1. # 1 CSU’s EPA-FUNDED PROGRAM ON “APPLYING SPATIAL AND TEMPORTAL MODELING OF STATISTICAL SURVEYS TO AQUATIC RESOURCES” N. SCOTT URQUHART RESEARCH SCIENTIST DEPARTMENT OF STATISTICS COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY

2. # 2  > Indicatator Development - Statistical Perspecitves  > EMAP Site Selection  > The EPA STAR Programs in Statistics (CSU and OrSU)  > Data Management - Importance of Meta Data  > - Value of Analysis from a Common Data Base

3. # 3 FIRST - A NAME  THE PROGRAM UNDER DISCUSSION WILL BE CALLED:  “SPACE-TIME AQUATIC RESOURCES MODELING AND ANALYSIS PROGRAM”  CONSEQUENCE: EASY ACRONYM = STARMAP

4. # 4 OVERVIEW OF THIS TALK  WHO IS INVOLVED  EPA’s REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS (“RFA”)  RESPONSES FROM  CSU - Major Participants  Oregon State University  WHAT IS EMAP  IN PARTICULAR, EMAP-TYPE DATA

5. # 5 WHO IS INVOLVED? Jay Breidt Richard Davis Jennifer Hoeting Hari Iyer Scott Urquhart Dave Theobald - Natural Resources Ecology Lab Robin Reich - Forest Science Jim Loftis - Bioresources Engineering Collaborators at OSU, SCCWRP, WQTI

6. # 6 EPA’s REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS (RFA)  CONTENT REQUIREMENTS  RESEARCH IN STATISTICS MANY OF US WOULD CALL THE REQUESTED “RESEARCH” ADAPTATION or DEVELOPMENT  TRAINING OF “FUTURE GENERATIONS” OF ENVIRONMENTAL STATISTICIANS  OUTREACH TO THE STATES and TRIBES  ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS

7. # 7 EPA’s REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS (RFA) - continued  MAJOR ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENT  “… EACH OF THE TWO PROGRAMS ESTABLISHED WILL INVOLVE COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH AT MULTIPLE, GEOGRAPHICALLY DIVERSE SITES.”  CLOSE COOPERATION BETWEEN TWO PROGRAMS SPECIFICALLY TO AVOID DUPLICATION OF EFFORT ===> JOINT ANNUAL MEETING ++

8. # 8 EPA’s REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS (RFA) - continued III  FUNDING LEVEL: $750K/YEAR/PROGRAM  THE TWO PROGRAMS:  DESIGN-BASED/MODEL ASSISTED SURVEY METHODOLOGY - @ OSU  SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL MODELING, INCORPORATING HIERARCHICAL SURVEY DESIGN, DATA ANALYSIS, MODELING - @ CSU  CHECK ON THE RFA @  http://es.epa.gov/ncerqa/rfa/aquastat01.html

9. # 9 RESPONSE to RFA from CSU  INSTITUTIONS:  COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY STATISTICS NATURAL RESOURCES ECOLOGY LAB FOREST SCIENCE BIORESOURCE AND AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING  OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY (PROGRAM 1, too)  SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COASTAL WATER RESEARCH PROJECT  WATER QUALITY TECHNOLOGY, INC

10. # 10 CSU PROPOSAL - CONTENT  1. COMBINING ENVIRONMENTAL DATA  2. LOCAL INFERENCE  3. DEVELOPING AQUATIC INDICATORS  4. OUTREACH  5. ADMINISTRATION/COORDINATION

11. # 11 CSU PROPOSAL - APPROACH  TAKE EXISTING SETS OF  PROBABILITY &  NON-PROBABILITY DATA  START WORKING WITH THE DATA WITH A PERSPECTIVE OF DRAWING INFERENCES IDENTIFY ISSUES WE DON’T KNOW HOW TO HANDLE HAVE POST-DOCS AND PRE-DOCTORAL STUDENTS CONDUCT RESEARCH ON THESE TOPICS

12. # 12 CSU PROPOSAL - CONTENT CONTINUED  1. COMBINING ENVIRONMENTAL DATA  FROM SURVEYS TO REMOTELY SENSED  POSSIBLY INCLUDING INFORMATION FROM “HAND-PICKED”SITES  JENNIFER HOETING DAVIS, BREIDT, REICH, STEVENS (OSU), WEISBERG (SCCWRP), LEECASTER (INL)

13. # 13 CSU PROPOSAL - CONTENT CONTINUED  2. LOCAL INFERENCE  SMALL AREA EST’M + DECONVOLUTION  JAY BREIDT DAVIS, HOETING, GITELMAN (OSU)

14. # 14 CSU PROPOSAL - CONTENT CONTINUED II  3. DEVELOPING AQUATIC INDICATORS  DEVELOPING DATA TO USE IN SPATIAL ANALYSES LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY REGIONAL TAXONOMIC RICHNESS  DAVE THEOBALD, NATURAL RESOURCES ECOLOGY LAB URQUHART, RITTER (SCCWRP)

15. # 15 CSU PROPOSAL - CONTENT CONTINUED III  4. OUTREACH  “PROPOSALS SHOULD SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THE EXTENSION OF EXPERTISE ON DESIGN AND ANALYSIS TO STATES AND TRIBES”  HARI IYER & NSU PREPARED THIS PART OF THE CSU RESPONSE DAVIS, REICH, JIM LOFTIS (BIORESOURCES ENGINEERING), STEPHEN JOHNSON (WATER QUALITY TECHNOLOGY)

16. # 16 CSU PROPOSAL - CONTENT CONTINUED III  5. ADMINISTRATION  INTEGRATION AND COORDINATION  URQUHART & DAVIS STEVENS (OSU) AQUATIC SUPPORT: HERLIHY & HUGHES (OSU)  GET ALL SORT OF REPORTS TO EPA IN A TIMELY MANNER

17. # 17 CSU PROPOSAL - FUNDED ACTIVITIES  POST DOCTORAL FELLOWS  DOCTORAL STUDENTS  FACULTY TIME  OTHER  SUBCONTRACT TO OSU  COMPUTING EQUIPMENT  SUPPORT/TRAVEL

18. # 18 OSU COMPANION PROPOSAL  SIMILARILY STRUCTURED  MAJOR DIFFERENCE = FOCUS  DESIGN-BASED/MODEL ASSISTED  OSU SUBCONTRACT TO CSU THE SAME SCALE AS CSU SUBCONTRACT TO OSU  BOTH PROGRAMS HAVE OTHER SUBCONTRACTORS THE FIRST YEAR

19. # 19 WHAT IS DISTINCTIVE ABOUT “AQUATIC RESOURCES”?  THEY ARE THINGS LIKE  STREAMS  RIVERS  WETLANDS  LAKES & PONDS  ESTUARIES  PRAIRIE POTHOLES  NEAR COASTAL OCEANIC WATERS

20. # 20 WHAT IS DISTINCTIVE ABOUT’ “AQUATIC RESOURCES”? CONTINUED  FOR MOST AQUATIC RESOURCES,  THERE ARE MANY “SMALL” ONES  PROGRESSIVELY FEWER AS THEY GET BIGGER  INTEREST, BIOLOGICAL & SOCIETAL, TENDS TO STAY CONSTANT OR EVEN INCREASE WITH SIZE  SIMPLE RANDOM SAMPLING WOULD SELECT MOSTLY “SMALL” ONES, FEW “BIG” ONES.  IMPLICATION: UNEQUAL PROBABILITY SAMPLING

21. # 21 WHAT IS DISTINCTIVE ABOUT’ “AQUATIC RESOURCES”? CONTINUED II  SPATIAL STATISTICS TENDS TO FOCUS ON TWO-DIMENSIONAL SPACE  STREAMS AND RIVERS ESSENTIALLY AMOUNT TO ONE-DIMENSIONAL OBJECTS IN TWO-SPACE  BUT MUCH LANDSCAPE INFORMATION IS COMPLETE COVERAGE IN TWO-SPACE  CHALLENGE:  MERGE THESE PERSPECTIVES

22. # 22 WHAT IS EMAP - THE DATA SOURCE?  EPA HAS AN OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT (ORD)  THE E NVIRONMENTAL M ONITORING AND A SSESSMENT P ROGRAM IS ONE OF ORD’s “FLAGSHIP RESEARCH PROGRAMS”  EVOLVED FROM A GROUP OF RELATED SURVEYS OF STREAM AND LAKE CHEMISTRY DONE BY EPA IN EARLY TO MID 1980’s.

23. # 23 EMAP WAS (1989 - 1994)  CONCEIVED TO PROVIDE AN INDICATION OF THE STATUS AND TRENDS IN A VARIETY OF ECOSYSTEMS  STATISTICALLY DEFENSIBLE  FOR “ALL” ECOSYSTEMS SURFACE WATERS, WETLANDS, ESTUATIES & NEAR COASTAL FORESTS, AGRICULTURAL, ARID LANDS INTENDED TO COOPERATE WITH OTHER AGENCIES

24. # 24 EMAP HAS COOPERATED WITH  MOST EPA REGIONS  NE (1 & 2) IN MAJOR SURVEY OF LAKES  MIDATLANTIC (3) ON EXTENSIVE SURVEY OF STREAMS  WESTERN RIVER AND STREAM PILOT (8, 9 & 10) - IN PROGRESS  MANY STATES  OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES  NEXT PAGE

25. # 25 EMAP HAS COOPERATED WITH CONTINUED  OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES  USDA FOREST SERVICE ===> MAJOR CHANGES IN THEIR SURVEY PERSPECTIVES NASS (NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL STATISTICAL SERVICE) MAINLY LED TO CHANGES IN RESPONSES EVALUATED  INTERIOR NATIONAL PARK SERVICE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY (USGS) BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES (FORMERLY PART OF FISH & WILDLIFE) SOME STREAM SURVEYS

26. # 26 EMAP HAS COOPERATED WITH CONTINUED II  OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES ...  INTERIOR … BUREAU OF RECLAMATION NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY  COMMERCE NOAA (NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION) - COAST WATCH PROGRAM NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE ( A BIT)

27. # 27 EMAP HAS CHANGED GREATLY  CHANGED FROM A MONITORING PROGRAM  TO A PROGRAM ON RESEARCH ON MONITORING EMPHASIS REDUCED TO SURFACE WATERS LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY

28. # 28 DISTINCTIVE EMAP PERSPECTIVE  DEFINE THE POPULATION OF INTEREST  CONDUCT A PROBABILITY SURVEY OF IT CAREFULLY DEFINE THE SAMPLING FRAME VARIABLE PROBABILITY SELECTION OF SITES, BUT WITH SPATIAL BALANCE CAREFULLY DEFINE RESPONSES TO BE EVALUATED TRAIN FIELD CREWS WELL MANAGE DATA WITH CARE AND AN “AUDIT TRAIL” LEARN FROM PAST MISTAKES, THROUGHOUT  SEE A FEW ILLUSTRATIONS

29. # 29 AN EMAP STUDY: NORTHEAST LAKES  LAKES in EPA REGIONS 1 & 2 = NY + NJ + NEW ENGLAND  EMAP = ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING and ASSESSMENT PROGRAM  TIME = TEMPORALLY INTEGRATED MONITORING of ECOSYSTEMS  EFFECT OF ACID RAIN IN MOUNTAINOUS NE  EVALUATED ONLY WATER CHEMISTRY

30. # 30 AN EMAP STUDY: NORTHEAST LAKES SAMPLING MODEL - DISCRETE  TWO STEP SELECTION PROCESS  FIRST STEP = SPATIALLY SYSTEMATIC EMAP = 1/64 EACH YEAR FOUR YEARS ===> 1/16 AREA SAMPLE  SECOND STEP = PROBABILITY INCLUSION PROB VARIED BY LAKE SIZE CLASS SPATIAL RESTRICTION - MILD CAN BE DESCRIBED FOR INTERESTED PEOPLE  TIME IS ESSENTIALLY THE SAME, EXCEPT AN ADDITIONAL 2/64 EXTRACTION WAS DONE ONLY IN ITS AREAS OF INTEREST

31. # 31 MAP OF SITES VISITED

32. # 32 AN EMAP STUDY: NORTHEAST LAKES SAMPLE SIZES: EMAP UNIQUE ----- REVISITS ----- SITESSAME YEARNEXT YR 1991 6525 0 1992 7715 7 1993 85 7 7 1994 79 6 6 1995 52 6 6 TOTAL 3065320

33. # 33 AN EMAP STUDY: NORTHEAST LAKES SAMPLE SIZES: EMAP + TIME UNIQUE ----- REVISITS ----- SITESSAME YEARNEXT YR 1991 9325 0 1992 12415 7 1993 106 8 8 1994 107 9 8 1995 70 8 8 TOTAL 4305723

34. # 34 MIDATLANTIC HIGHLANDS ASSESSMENT (MAHA) of STREAMS  MOSTLY IN EPA REGION 3  PA, VA, WV, MD, NY/NJ  MANY PARTICIPANTS  FUNDING = EMAP - OVER WHOLE STUDY REGION  TIME - UPLAND STREAMS FOR ACID DEPOSITION  REMAP = REGIONAL EMAP - REGION 3 VALLEY STREAMS IN “RIDGE & VALLEY” AREA  STATE PERSONNEL VERY INVOLVED IN FIELD WORK

35. # 35 MAHA Study Design: Probability Survey

36. # 36 EMAP ILLUSTRATION: WESTERN STREAMS & RIVERS  EPA REGIONS 8, 9 & 10  8 = ND, SD, MT, WY, CO, UT  9 = AZ, NV, CA  10 = WA, OR, ID  ACTUALLY TWO INDEPENDENT STUDIES  “BLUE LINES” LABELED AS “NONPERENNIAL” BY USGS IN DIGITIZED 1:100,000 MAP FILES  FIELD VISITS TO POINTS LABELED “PERENNIAL”

37. # 37

38. # 38 EMAP ILLUSTRATION: WESTERN STREAMS & RIVERS  EMAP SAMPLE COVERS ENTIRE STUDY AREA  REGIONS, AS REMAP, INTENSIFIED SAMPLE IN CERTAIN LOCATIONS REGION 8: MIDDLE MISSOURI & SD REGION 9: MOUNTAINOUS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA & AN AREA IN NW CALIFORNIA REGION 10: AN AREA IN SOUTH CENTRAL WA AND NORTH CENTRAL OR

39. # 39 EMAP ILLUSTRATION: WESTERN STREAMS & RIVERS  SAMPLING MODEL  CONTINUOUS USED ENTIRE RF3 ===> NATIONAL HYDROGRAPHY DATASET NONPERENNIAL PERENNIAL AS SAMPLING FRAME VARIED SAMPLING DENSITY DEPENDING ON STREAM ORDER or RIVER SIZE WITH SPATIAL RESTRICTIONS STRATIFICATION BY STATE

40. # 40 OREGON - WESTERN PILOT

41. # 41 OREGON WESTERN PILOT + DESCHUTES/JOHN DAY

42. # 42 SAMPLING THE CALIFORNIA BIGHT CONTINUOUS IN TWO DIMENSIONS  MANY LOCAL AND MULTI-COUNTY JURISTICTIONS  VARIED SAMPLING RATE BY OCEAN DEPTH  CONCENTRATED SAMPLING CLOSE TO SEWAGE “OUTFALLS”  NESTING OF VARIABLES EVALUATED INCLUDED IN SPATIAL CONTROL

43. # 43 SELECTING SITES - ILLUSTRATION

44. # 44 DISTINCTIVE EMAP PERSPECTIVE CONTINUED  IF DISCIPLINES LACK TOOLS, SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT OF THEM  STATISTICS INCLUDED EXAMPLE: EXTEND CONCEPTS OF SAMPLING FROM FINITE POPULATION TO SPATIALLY CONTINUOUS POPULATIONS NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTER FOR STATISTICS AND THE ENVIRONMENT (~ $1M/YEAR) UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON PAST 5 YEARS NOW TO BE AT UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO TWO PROGRAMS UNDER DISCUSSION HERE

45. # 45 FUTURE NEEDS - STATES & TRIBES  STATES AND TRIBES MUST REPORT ON THE CONDITION OF ALL “WATERS” UNDER THEIR JURISTICTION  A REQUIREMENT OF SECTION 305b OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT  RESULTS IN BIANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS  STARTING IN 2004 THE RECOMMENDED STANDARDS WILL CHANGE TO BEING BASED ON PROBABILITY SAMPLING  OUTREACH PROJECT OPPORTUNITY!