NHD - Stewardship Progress in Arkansas by Katy Hattenhauer

The Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) officially accepted the role of the NHD Steward for the State of Arkansas on October 15, 2008. Since that time the AR Technical Working (TWG) has grown and continues to develop policies and instructions to make the NHD in AR more outstanding. The TWG has developed and attended meetings and trainings. A status map has been made to assist the TWG in their editing processes. An upcoming web edit tool, which will be disbursed for public use, will also aid the TWG in the editing process of the NHD. In 2013, in conjunction with the AGIO, ADEQ created an event dataset, which was added to the NHD to aid the “Tum Around, Don’t Drown” efforts. With all of these things combined, the TWG is moving forward to develop and maintain higher resolution NHD datasets across the state.

Transcript

1. NHD – Stewardship Progress in Arkansas By: Katy Hattenhauer ADEQ GIS Manager September 12, 2013
2. History of NHD  What does NHD mean?  USGS Digital Line Graph (DLG) & EPA RF3  Complete, seamless, nation-wide coverage at 1:100,000 scale in 2002  Newer 1:24,000 scale completed by July 2007  NHD is standard hydrography coverage for the nation
3. History of NHD  NHD also features flow-direction capability  Study cause-and-effect relationships  Many other capabilities  Therefore, ideally suited for The National Map
5. History of NHD Stewardship  USGS NHD Stewardship program for States  Designed to help with maintenance of NHD  Signed MOU 10/15/08
6. What we’ve been through so far  Shelby Johnson – Kickoff  Our Goal – make state recommendations on strategy moving forward  Started with monthly meetings; now held when needed  Flow chart
8. Examples  Examples of problem areas  How we plan on fixing these problems and accomplishing stewardship
12. Flowline Error
14. Stream Order Classification
15. •Uses the Strahler Stream Order Method •Smaller streams entering a higher- ordered stream do not change its order number •Is available on GeoStor!
16. Water Issues in the State  A myriad of issues, mostly environmental concerns  Flow networks; missing flowlines and waterbodies  GNIS Names
17. Organization of agencies  Most of our state agencies have their own water division to handle NHD-type issues  APCEC  GIS Board
18. People Involved  POC – Dave Arnold, Rolla, MO  NSDI Liaison – Bill Sneed, AR  Sub-stewards are as follows:  AGS AHTD ADH City of Conway  ADEQ AGFC U of A (CAST)  Green Bay Packaging  UAEX
19. Applying NHD  Fayetteville Shale Project  Flow navigation in disasters  Low Water Crossings
20. Issues and Challenges  With the NHD – Interagency; different datasets  With stewardship – getting substewards, and making policies  What works – support, acts in place  What doesn’t work – lack of support, confusion
21. Solutions  Sub-stewards’ meetings  TWG policy decisions  State GIS Coordinator to lobby for us  Training  Easy to follow instructions – training manual, flow charts  Goal – to make state recommendations on strategy moving forward
22. What’s on the road ahead?  Border states – how to fix problem areas  Policy making, policy changing decisions  Reg 2 datasets available on GeoStor!  AGIO webpage for meeting notes and status map
25. What’s on the road ahead?  Trainings, meetings, and editing  Hope to get started with full editing process in summer 2009 – accomplished!  Training is FREE!!!  Host trainings at ADEQ, and via webinar sessions.
26. NHD-WET
33. Advantages of the NHD-WET  Allows distribution of spatial data to anyone with a browser  Allows users to perform specific editing functions  Application development is centralized to a single server  Reduces desktop application maintenance  NO GIS LICENSE!!!
34. Low Water Crossings
35. Low Water Crossings  Represent a socio-economic challenge for AR primarily due to loss of life  Flash flooding events – locations have become dangerous  Led to our state’s public service announcements - “Turn Around Don’t Drown”  Prior to this project, state and county planners have lacked a systematic method for locating, prioritizing, and addressing these problem locations.
36. Low Water Crossings - Phases  Two-Phase Approach  Phase I – use GIS techniques to quickly establish low water crossing locations.  Phase II – Develop accuracy assessments to validate the analysis from Phase I.
37. Low Water Crossings - Analysis  Used existing framework data from the State  AHTD contributed state bridge location data, including all bridges which are inspected under AHTD  AGIO contributed Road Centerline File, including all roads contained within the County E9-1-1 systems  Determine scope of project, then focus on assigning event features to the NHD
38. Low Water Crossings - Importance  Identifying all low water crossings within the state will greatly reduce the economic impact of flooding, future infrastructure and transportation planning, and will greatly assist in emergency response coordination when flooding occurs.  Final outcome – event dataset on the NHD related by reachcode.
39. 84,806 Low Water Crossing Results
40. Low Water Crossings – QA/QC  HEM Tool  88,808 after completion and final QA/QC  Deleted the extra points it created  USGS – Events Clearinghouse
41. THANK YOU!!! Katy Hattenhauer hattenhauer@adeq.state.ar.us 501-682-0945
42. Questions?