Streamgaging Task Force Summary Report

1
Streamgaging Task ForceSummary Report

• Advisory Committee on Water Information
• Herndon, Virginia
• September 10, 2003

2
Advisory Committee on Water InformationStreamgagi
ng Task Force

• Commissioned by the ACWI in 1998.
• Charge Determine the streamflow information
  needs of the Nation, identify the optimal
  streamgaging network to meet the needs, and
  prepare recommendations for funding
  responsibilities.

3
Streamgaging Task Force Members

• Interstate Council on Water Policy
• U. S. Geological Survey
• American Association of State Geologists
• American Society of Civil Engineers
• American Water Resources Association
• Association of State Floodplain Managers
• Association of Western State Engineers
• Ground Water Protection Council

4
Streamgaging Task Force Members

• Tennessee Valley Authority
• Western States Water Council
• Bureau of Reclamation
• National Weather Service
• Natural Resources Conservation Service
• U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
• U. S. Army Corps of Engineers

5
Streamgaging Task ForceApproach

• Identified goals of a national network
• Compiled information on all available
  streamgaging stations
• Evaluated the achievement of National goals using
  the USGS network model
• Identified additional stations needed to achieve
  each goal
• Recommended a core streamgaging network
• Proposed funding strategies

6
Streamgaging Task ForceConcurrent Activities

• USGS developed their own plan for a National
  Streamflow Information Program (NSIP).
• The Interstate Council on Water Policy was
  commissioned to conduct a series of four
  workshops on NSIP and considerations for a
  national streamgaging network.

7
Streamgaging Task ForceFinal Report

• Submitted to ACWI on April 3, 2002
• Chairman proposed a 30-day comment period
  followed by a telephone conference call
• Comments were received from League of Women
  Voters, USDA, and Universities Council on Water
  Resources
• USGS provided comments in February 2003 and
  suggested several changes to the recommendations

8
Streamgaging Task ForceFinal Report Comments

• League of Women Voters
• Need adequate data for flood protection
• Determine which agency Congress is most likely to
  fund for the national streamgaging network
• Protect critical environmental areas
• USDA-NRCS
• Real-time data delivery

9
Streamgaging Task ForceFinal Report Comments

• Universities Council on Water Resources
• Cost of gages should be compared with benefits
• TMDL goal is high priority difficult to quantify
• Real-time data delivery

10
Streamgaging Task ForceFinal Report Comments

• USGS
• All components of NSIP are equally important
• Network expenditures should not be restricted to
  new stations and infrastructure costs when
  existing network is not stable
• Funding core network with multiple agencies is a
  flawed approach

11
Streamgaging Task ForceFinal Report Follow-up

• League of Women Voters, USDA, and UCOWR comments
  addressed by Chairs
• USGS comments were sent to Task Force members
• Responses received from AASG, ASFPM, and ICWP
• Clarifying statements added to final report

12
Streamgaging Task ForceNetwork Recommendations

• Recommendation 1. -- USGS should adopt the
  following goals for NSIP
• A. Support NWS and NRCS flow forecasting
• B. Monitor streamflow of hydrologic cataloguing
  units (8-digit HUCs)
• C. Support Compacts, Supreme Court decrees, and
  international border crossings
• D. Monitor long-term trends in streamflow with an
  expanded Hydrologic Benchmark Network
• Larger network of HUC8 gages will support flood
  protection, water quality and quantity management
  and other goals.

13
Proposed NSIP Streamgaging Network
14
Streamgaging Task ForceNetwork Recommendations

• Recommendation 2. Use the COOP program and the
  watershed approach for meeting other streamflow
  information needs
• Establish new stations in HUC 10 watersheds based
  on local, state, and national needs
• 25 percent coverage of each HUC 8 watershed
• Data for critical environmental areas will be
  provided through the COOP program.

15
Streamgaging Task ForceNetwork Recommendations

• Recommendation 3. -- Stations providing flood
  data about communities participating in the
  National Flood Insurance Program should have a
  high priority within the USGS COOP program.
• USGS and Federal Emergency Management Agency work
  with communities to establish a crest-stage gage
  network

16
Streamgaging Task ForceFunding and Related
Strategies

• Recommendation 4. The USGS should implement the
  network components of NSIP in five years. The
  report was revised to reflect the Task Forces
  support for full funding of NSIP, however, the
  network should be emphasized in the initial years
  of the program.
• Recommendation 5. -- USGS and its cooperators
  should continue to seek increases in COOP.
• Restore historic 5050 funding

17
Streamgaging Task ForceFunding and Related
Strategies

• Recommendation 6. -- Network components of NSIP
  should be implemented by using funding increases
  to support new or reactivated stations and
  infrastructure costs. Report was revised to
  support the use of NSIP funds for existing
  stations when cooperator funds are lost and the
  stability of the network is affected.

18
Streamgaging Task ForceFunding and Related
Strategies

• Recommendation 7. -- Each USGS District, in
  collaboration with its cooperators, should
  develop a streamgaging strategy, including a
  priority system for adding new stations.
• Recommendation 8. USGS should use NSIP
  infrastructure funds to verify and upgrade, if
  necessary, the quality and distribution of data
  from stations operated by other agencies. This
  includes real-time data delivery.

19
Streamgaging Task ForceFunding and Related
Strategies

• Recommendation 9. -- USGS should continue
  cooperation with other Federal agencies. This
  recommendation was intended for both the USGS and
  cooperating Federal agencies. USGS should fund
  the NSIP network other Federal agencies should
  continue to support other components of the
  national streamgaging network
• Recommendation 10. A similar network evaluation
  should be conducted in another 10 years.

20
Streamgaging Task ForceFinal Report

• Task Force requests that the ACWI endorse the
  final report and take action on the appropriate
  recommendations.