EPA/620/R-93/009
September 1993
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS
Environmental Monitoring And
Assessment Program
Edited by
Bruce G. Potter
American Management Systems
1777 North Kent Street
Arlington, Virginia 22209
EPA Contract No. 68-D9-0093
(Work Assignment No. 2-5
Under Subcontract to Versar, Inc.)
Prepared for
Laura E. Jackson
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
EMAP Research and Assessment Center (MD-75)
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, DC 20460
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
Abstract
Abstract
EMAP Project Descriptions summarizes the projects and activities
being undertaken by each of the resource, integration and assessment,
and coordination groups which constitute the Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment Program. The project descriptions are
organized by each EMAP group, and include a description of the
current status and plans for each of the resource groups, as well as
major products, and cooperating and collaborating institutions for each
project.
The document contains Appendices listing major cooperating federal
agencies, state and local governments, and universities and other non-
governmental organizations; in addition, the document is
comprehensively indexed.
Key Words
environmental monitoring—research, indicators (biology)—research,
ecology—research, ecology—management, environmental
management, risk assessment, statistics research, sampling,
USEPA-EMAP.
The suggested citation for this report is:
EMAP. 1993. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
Project Descriptions. EPA/620/R-93/009. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, Office of Modeling, Monitoring Systems
and Quality Assurance. Washington, DC
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Preface
The Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP) is a
joint effort of the Office of Modeling, Monitoring Systems, and Quality
Assurance and the Office of Environmental Processes and Effects
Research, within EPA's Office of Research and Development.
This document has been prepared to provide information on the major
projects within EMAP, especially those scheduled to be completed in
1993 and 1994. EMAP was formally initiated in 1990, and many of its
component projects are still in stages of planning and pilot studies.
Descriptions of the projects contained in this document as well as lists
of available products reflect current program plans, but details are
subject to change as EMAP plans are refined. This document is the
fourth annual list of EMAP projects, and it is anticipated that this
document will be updated periodically to reflect current plans.
For further information on any part of EMAP, contact the appropriate
EMAP Contact noted on each Project Description, or the General
Sources noted on the back page of this document.
-------
Table of Contents
Contents
Key Words ii
Contents iv
Section 1.0 Overview of the Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment Program 1
EMAP and Ecological Risk 2
The EMAP Approach 2
EMAP Organization 3
EMAP as a Cooperative Effort 5
Section 2.0 Resource Monitoring and Research 9
2.1 Agroecosystems 10
FY92 Pilot Project in North Carolina 11
FY93 Pilot Project in Nebraska 12
Conceptual Model and Assessment Questions 13
Potential Condition Indicators for Agroecosystems 13
FY94 Demonstration and Pilot Field Projects 14
2.2 Arid Ecosystems 15
CIS Technology Integrated with
Ecological Condition Indicators 16
Workgroup on Nominal or Subnominal
Ecological Condition 17
Indicator Plot Design 17
2.3 Estuaries 18
Program and Operations Center 18
Virginian Province 20
Louisianian Province 21
Carolinian Province 22
2.4 Forest Health Monitoring. 24
Detection Monitoring 25
Southeastern Loblolly-Shortleaf Pine Demonstration 25
Southern Appalachian Man and the Biosphere Project 26
2.5 Great Lakes 28
Diatoms: Indicators of Biotic Integrity and Trophic Status 28
Benthic Communities in Lake Michigan 29
Sampling for Fish in the Great Lakes 29
Nearshore Sampling in Lake Michigan 29
Off-Shore Pilot Monitoring for Trophic Status
in Lake Michigan and Lake Superior 30
2.6 Landscapes 31
Landscape Monitoring Approach 32
Landscape Values and Conceptual Models 33
A National Landscape Assessment: Relationship of Bird
Abundance and Species Richness to Landscape Patterns 34
2.7 Surface Waters 36
Northeast Lakes Demonstration 36
Stream Condition in the Mid-Atlantic Highlands 38
Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Fish 39
Wisconsin Lakes: Interagency Pilot 39
IV
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions ' ; September 1993
2.8 Wetlands 40
Estuarine Emergent 40
Palustrine Emergent 42
Section 3.0 Integration and Assessment 45
3.1 Assessment and Reporting 46
EMAP Advisory Panel and Workshops 47
Determination of Social and Societal Values 47
Development of EMAP Reporting Guidelines 47
Regional Ecosystem Assessment Prototype 48
Symposium on Ecosystem Health 48
3.2 Design and Statistics 50
Design Coordination 51
Status Estimation Research 51
R-EMAP Design Support 52
Global Grid Development 53
Environmental Monitoring and Statistics Research 54
3.3 Indicator Development 56
Summary and Revision of EMAP's
Indicator Development Strategy 56
Review: Conceptual Models for Indicator Development
and Resource Assessment 57
Development;of Cross-Cutting Assessment Questions and
Indicators 57
3.4 Information Management 58
User Interaction and Planning 59
Information Management Architecture 60
Systems Engineering 61
Systems Support and Operations 61
Geographic Information Systems Interface 61
Interagency Data Interchange 62
Advanced Technology Evaluation 62
Computer Science Direction 62
3.5 Landscape Characterization 64
Geographic Reference Database 65
Land-Cover Classification System Development 66
Land Cover Generation 66
Sampling Frame Development 67
Extent Estimation • 68
Chesapeake Bay Watershed Pilot 68
Resource Group Pilot Support 69
R-EMAP Technical Assistance.. 69
3.6 Quality Assurance 70
Development of EMAP Data Quality Objectives 70
The EMAP-Quality Assurance Plan, and the
EMAP Management Systems Review 70
Quality Assurance Support 70
3.7 Methods 71
EMAP-Methods Guidance Documents 71
Methods Data Base.. 71
Methods Validation Protocols 71
Establish Taxonomic Coding System for EMAP 72
3.8 Logistics 73
Geographic Positioning Systems (GPS) 73
-------
Table of Contents
Section 4.0 EMAP Program Coordination 75
Introduction .'. 75
4.1 Regional-EMAP (R-EMAP) 76
Introduction 75
R-EMAP Projects 77
4.2 International Activities 81
Introduction 81
Earthwatch 82
Technical Assistance 83
4.3 Arctic Programs 84
Introduction 84
Support for Arctic Contaminants Research Program (ACRPJ.... 84
Indicators of Organic Contaminants 84
Pilot Study of Organic and Inorganic Contaminants 85
4.4 Administrative Liaison 86
Introduction 86
Atmospheric and Acid Deposition Data 86
Risk Assessment Forum 87
Appendix A 90
Appendix B 91
Appendix C 92
Appendix D 94
Appendix E 99
Index 102
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Section 1.0 Overview of the Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment Program
Contents of Section 1
Introduction ,
EMAP and Ecological Risk
The EMAP Approach
EMAP Organization
EMAP as a Cooperative Effort
Introduction
Both the incidence and scale of reported environmental problems in
the United States have increased over the past two decades. The public
is increasingly concerned that the resources upon which they rely for
recreation, quality of life, and economic livelihood remain sustainable.
Scientists are concerned that the impact of pollutants and other envi-
1 ronmental stresses now extends well beyond the local scale: climate
change, acidic deposition, ozone depletion, non-point source pollu-
1 tion, sediment discharges to waterways, and habitat alteration threaten
our ecosystems on regional and global scales. Years of scientific study
.2 have heightened environmental awareness and have convinced the
U.S. public that the ecological processes determining how our ecosys-
.3 terns respond to both natural and anthropogenic disturbances are ex-
tremely complex. Unfortunately, the current status of the environment
.5 is not accurately or comprehensively documented, which makes it im-
possible to assess quantitatively where and at what rate degradation or
change may be occurring. While we believe that our government's
policies and programs are protecting the quality of the environment,
we have not as yet been able to prove this contention with currently
available data.
Reported problems, for example, may be increasing across extensive
areas of the country, or the reports may simply reflect a more informed
and vocal public. Further, it cannot be determined whether the poli-
cies and programs now in place are effective to restore damaged
resources or to protect those perceived to be threatened. Clearly, there
is a need for a national baseline against which future changes in the
condition of natural resources can be measured and the overall effec-
tiveness of environmental policies can be evaluated with confidence.
In 1988, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Science
Advisory Board recommended implementing a program to monitor
ecological status and trends that would identify emerging
environmental problems before they reach crisis proportions. The next
year, EPA called for confirmation that its programs are truly maintain-
ing or improving environmental quality. The Environmental Monitoring
and Assessment Program (EMAP) is part of the Office of Research and
Development's (ORD's) response to both the Science Advisory Board's
recommendation and the Agency's call for "managing for results."
EMAP's goal is to monitor the condition of the Nation's ecological re-
sources, thereby contributing to decisions on environmental protection
and management. EMAP data will enable policy makers, scientists, and
the public to evaluate the success of current policies and programs and
to identify emerging problems before they become widespread or
irreversible.
-------
EMAP Overview
Introduction
EMAP and
Ecological Risk
The EMAP Approach
Figure 1. The four principal
objectives of the Environmental
Monitoring and
Assessment Program.
EMAP's data strengthens ORD's Ecological Risk Assessment Program.
When fully implemented in cooperation with other agencies that share
resource monitoring responsibilities, this coordinated research,
monitoring and assessment effort will provide the information needed
to document the current condition of our ecological resources, and to
understand why that condition exists. Such information will enable
EPA to take proactive steps to minimize future risk or to revise current
efforts that fall short of their intended results.
Several key questions have been formulated to guide the program
toward meeting its goal:
What is the current extent of our ecological resources, and how
are they distributed geographically?
What is the current status of the ecological condition of the
resources?
What proportions of the resources are degrading or improving, in
what regions, and at what rates?
Are these changes correlated with patterns and trends in environ-
mental stresses?
Are adversely affected resources improving in response to control
and mitigation programs?
These questions pose many challenges that cannot be met without a
long-term commitment to environmental monitoring on national and
regional scales. EMAP seeks to answer these questions by addressing
the four objectives shown in Figure 1.
EMAP Objectives
Estimate the current status of, and trends and changes
* in selected indicators of the condition of the Nation's
ecological resources on a regional basis with known
statistical confidence;
Estimate the geographic coverage and extent of the
2 Nation's ecological resources with known statistical
confidence;
Seek associations between selected indicators of natural
3 and anthropogenic stresses and indicators of the
condition of ecological resources; and
* Provide annual statistical summaries and periodic
^ assessments of the Nation's ecological resources.
The EMAP approach to monitoring provides many advantages for long-
term, large-scale environmental assessment. Some of these are
• broad geographic coverage,
• quantitative and unbiased estimates of ecological status and
trends,
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
EMAP Organization
• data to support the analysis of associations between indicators of
natural and anthropogenic stresses and indicators of the condition
of ecological resources, and
• flexibility to accommodate sampling of multiple types of resources
and to identify emerging environmental issues.
To implement this approach efficiently, EMAP planning, research and
field activities have involved other federal agencies and other
organizations within EPA, including the program and regional offices.
As specific plans for implementation are formulated, EMAP is also
enlisting the assistance of state agencies located within the particular
areas targeted for monitoring. The development of monitoring plans,
which undergo research and verification as well as rigorous technical
review by national scientific organizations, is also occurring in concert
with many university cooperators. (See below for a discussion of
EMAP's cooperative relationships with other organizations.)
EMAP's coordinated monitoring efforts, which will operate on regional
scales over periods of years to decades, involve collecting data from
eight resource categories: arid ecosystems, agroecosystems, forests,
inland surface waters, the Great Lakes, wetlands, estuaries, and
landscapes. Field crews will measure biological, chemical, and
physical variables and processes on statistically-selected sampling sites
for multiple resource classes. Some of these measurements will also be
made by using remote sensing techniques. Data on atmospheric
deposition and exposure to other selected stressors also will be ob-
tained. Maps, aerial photography, and satellite imagery will be used to
describe broad regional patterns of the landscape in areas where sam-
pling is being conducted. The program is undertaking a number of
special studies to ensure that it is able to make maximum use of exist-
ing environmental monitoring information and systems. Given the
scope of its vision, EMAP wants to avoid duplication and is actively
building on the experience of past efforts.
Organizationally, EMAP has three major elements: Resource Monitor-
ing and Research, Integration and Assessment, and Program Coordina-
tion (Figure 2). Resource Monitoring and Research focuses on the
identification of appropriate indicators of ecological condition, the col-
lection of field data, and the interpretation of data on the condition of
each of the eight EMAP ecological resource categories.
-------
EMAP Overview
Introduction
Figure 2.
EMAP Structure
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program |
1
Resource 1
Monitoring & 1
Research I
Agroecosystems |
Arid Ecosystems
Estuaries
Forests
Great Lakes
Landscapes
Surface Waters
Wetlands
Integration
&
Assessment
Assessment and
Reporting
Design and
Statistics
Indicator
Development
Information
Management
Landscape
Characterization
Quality Assurance
Methods
Logistics
Program
Coordination
Regional - EMAP
International
Activities
Arctic Program
Atmospheric and
Deposition Data
Risk Assessment
Forum
Several integration and assessment activities support EMAP's resource
monitoring efforts: landscape characterization, statistical analysis and
network design, ecological indicator development, information man-
agement, assessment and reporting, logistics, methods, and quality
assurance. A principal function of the integration and assessment
groups is to ensure that data collection activities by the individual re-
source groups are conducted in compatible ways to enable
comprehensive regional and national assessments. Integration and
assessment activities also include several functions that facilitate the
acquisition, management, and interpretation of monitoring data.
Program coordination includes technology transfer activities through
the Regional-EMAP (R-EMAP) program; liaison with the international
community, other agencies, states, and related cooperative programs
such as the Arctic Contaminants Research Program (ACRP) and the
Agency's Risk Assessment Forum; and overall coordination of EMAP's
peer review process.
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Figure 3. Relative funds
distribution for the three elements of
EMAP estimated (in $ 1,000,000's)
for fiscal year 1993 through 1996
(FY94 EMAP Issue Planning Paper,
1993)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
D Monitoring &
Research
I Integration & Q Program
Assessment Coordination
1993 1994 1995
Fiscal Years
1996
The allocation of funds among the three major elements of the
program is shown in Figure 3.
All major groups within EMAP conduct applied and exploratory re-
search that is relevant to their specific resource, coordination, or inte-
gration responsibilities.
EMAP as a Cooperative
Effort
EMAP will succeed only with the involvement and contributions of a
wide range of existing programs, from the local to the national level, in
both the public and the private sectors. EMAP has been designed, and
is being implemented, as a collaborative effort, with participation from
a variety of outside groups including other federal agencies, states, aca-
demic institutions and a variety of private and non-governmental orga-
nizations.
A diverse group of participants support EMAP as illustrated by the
relative distribution of the EMAP budget among various funding vehi-
cles for FY93. (Figure 4, on the next page)
-------
EMAP Overview
Introduction
Figure 4. EMAP Disbursements
—estimated for 1993
(FY94 EMAP Issue
Planning Paper, 1993)
Cooperating Federal Agencies
Regional, State and Local
Participation
Figure 5. States collaborating in one or more
EMAP projects.
Interagency
Agreements
21%
Grants
4%Other
6%
Cooperative
Agreements
29%
Off-Site
Contracts
26%
On-Site
Contracts
14%
Distribution of EMAP FY93 Resources
Partnerships with other federal agencies have been developed so that
EMAP will be closely coordinated with existing environmental pro-
grams and will augment, rather than duplicate, their research efforts.
Agencies with expertise in specific natural resource areas (such as the
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service in forests, and
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in
estuaries) increasingly share responsibility with EPA for EMAP's
monitoring in that resource. In Appendix C we list seventeen of
EMAP's major interagency relationships in program planning, design,
field implementation, analysis and assessment reporting.
Details concerning each agency's participation throughout EMAP's var-
ious components are presented under the list of contributing institu-
tions for each project description.
Whereas federal agencies participate in EMAP activities in order to
augment their own assessments of national or regional environmental
conditions or program effects, states, local agencies and special juris-
dictions generally look to EMAP to provide new technology or back-
ground information. The adjoining map shows which state govern-
ments are currently participating in EMAP projects. Appendix D identi-
fies current state and local agency participation with EMAP in more
detail. In addition to participating in monitoring of status and trends on
the Regional level, EPA Regional and state representatives are helping
to identify EMAP's applicability for ecological assessments on state and
multi-state scales. One element of this collaboration is the R-EMAP
(Regional-EMAP) project described in Section 4 of this document.
In addition to working with other federal agencies, EPA regional offices
and states directly, EMAP is also coordinating research with the
Agency's geographic initiatives and ORD issues such as the Great
Lakes, the Chesapeake Bay, the Gulf of Mexico, south Florida, national
wetlands and estuaries, Global Climate Change, Habitat/Biodiversity,
-------
LMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Peer Review
Academic Participation
and Eco-Risk. Cooperative research by EMAP and the Risk Assessment
Forum (See Section 4 of this document) includes distinguishing
ecological change due to natural processes from that caused by human
events, measuring ecological recovery from stress/and identifying
reference sites with which to assess ecological condition.
As EMAP is a developing program, its concepts, approaches, and
strategic plans must be subjected to critical review, tested in regional
demonstration projects, and periodically re-evaluated before they are
adopted as standard operating procedures. Periodic review and evalua-
tion will determine whether refinements to the program are necessary.
EMAP data, plans, and reports are presented for critical review to the
scientific community and representatives from government agencies
whose missions complement those of EMAP.
Expert peer review is a critical component of EMAP's research, simul-
taneously serving to strengthen the program's scientific base, and to
facilitate communications with significant constituencies. The program
supports four levels of peer review to ensure that appropriate attention
is given to each project area as well as to EMAP's general merit and
relevance. At the highest level, two separate boards review the
program's plans, results, and overall direction. The Ecological Effects
Committee of the EPA Science Advisory Board evaluates EMAP's
relevance to the ORD mission, including consistency with the goals of
the Ecological Risk Assessment Program and other ORD activities. A
joint committee of the National Academy of Science's National
Research Council assesses EMAP's scientific merit and its integration
both internally and with other government-sponsored monitoring
programs.
Specialized peer-review panels focus on individual EMAP project
areas. They determine the scientific merit of research plans and results
associated with field tests and full-scale monitoring, as well as cross-
program activities including statistical design, quality assurance, and
landscape characterization. These panels are assembled from inde-
pendent scientific organizations including the American Statistical As-
sociation and the Estuarine Research Federation, as well as from uni-
versity faculties and other agencies.
In the third level of EMAP peer review, laboratory, regional, and
program office collaborators evaluate the consistency of EMAP's
research plans and applications with the missions and procedures of
Agency partners. Relevant issues often include personnel and budget,
as well as science.
Finally, staff from EMAP's various resource groups periodically publish
research articles in national and international peer-reviewed journals.
In addition, the program co-sponsors and staff present findings at
conferences on ecological research and monitoring topics where
members of scientific organizations and institutions have the
opportunity to review and respond to EMAP activities and results.
One of EMAP's strengths derives from the diversity of skills and
experience in its extensive network of contacts with academic
institutions across the country. As examples of the range of academic
participation in the program, the Desert Research Institute of the
University of Nevada at Reno is the lead cooperator for the
development of ecological indicators and indices for EMAP-Arid
Ecosystems, while Oregon State University is leading a sampling
-------
EMAP Overview
Introduction
project in Alaska as part of EMAP's support for the Arctic Contaminants
Research Program.
While this document is not intended to detail the full extent of
university involvement in EMAP, each project description briefly
addresses the cooperative research being performed by all institutions
involved in the project. In addition, Appendix E provides a
comprehensive chart that lists the various roles played by all
universities currently participating in the program. Finally, individual
academic institutions can also be identified in the index, under
"Universities."
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Section 2.0 Resource Monitoring and Research
Contents for Section 2
2.1 Agroecosystems 10
FY92 Pilot Project in North Carolina 11
FY93 Pilot Project in Nebraska 12
Conceptual Model and Assessment Questions 13
Potential Condition Indicators for Agroecosystems .. 13
FY94 Demonstration and Pilot Field Projects 14
2.2 Arid Ecosystems 15
GIS Technology Integrated with
Condition Indicators 16
Workgroup on Nominal or Subnominal Ecological
Condition 17
Indicator Plot Design 17
2.3 Estuaries 18
Program and Operations Center 18
Virginian Province 20
Louisianian Province 21
Carolinian Province 22
2.4 Forest Health Monitoring 24
Detection Monitoring 25
Southeastern Loblolly-shortleaf Pine 25
Southern Appalachian Man and the
Biosphere Project (SAMAB) 26
2.5 Great Lakes 28
Diatoms: Indicators of Biotic Integrity
and Trophic Status 28
Benthic Communities in Lake Michigan 29
Sampling for Fish In the Great Lakes 29
Nearshore Sampling 29
Offshore Pilot Monitoring for Trophic Status in 30
2.6 Landscapes 31
Landscape Monitoring Approach 32
Landscape Values and Conceptual Models 33
A National Landscape Assessment: Relationship of
Bird Abundance and Species Richness to
Landscape Patterns 34
2.7 Surface Waters 36
Northeast Lakes Demonstration 36
Stream Condition in the Mid-Atlantic Highlands 38
Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Fish 38
Wisconsin Lakes Interagency Pilot 39
2.8 Wetlands 40
Estuarine Emergent 40
Palustrine Emergent 42
Introduction:
Resource Monitoring and
Indicator Development
EMAP monitoring activities for the eight resource groups are still in the
demonstration phase. The highest priority for all of the resource
groups—even those with the most advanced monitoring databases—is
indicator development and evaluation. Steps in the indicator
development process include
• formulation of assessment questions representing the highest level
of social values associated with each resource group;
• indicator development and evaluation based on the assessment
questions;
• pilot studies used to evaluate the sensitivity of indicators and to
estimate their variance components;
• tests of analytical methods, logistics, field sampling protocols and
information management procedures.
Subsequent to satisfactory completion of pilot studies—as verified by
peer reviews—demonstration projects are implemented to evaluate the
feasibility of conducting regional-scale monitoring of these indicators
and to evaluate whether the indicator will meet data quality objectives
at regional scales of resolution.
Appendix A summarizes the research and implementation schedule for
the eight resource groups from FY93 through FY97.
-------
Resource Monitoring and Research
Agroecosystems
Introduction
2.1 Agroecosystems
An agroecosystem is a dynamic association of crops, pastures,
livestock, other plants and animals, atmosphere, soils, and water.
Agroecosystems include not only the field, but also the associated
border areas such as windbreaks, fence rows, ditch banks, and farm
ponds. Agroecosystems are contained within larger landscapes that
include uncultivated land, drainage networks, rural communities, and
wildlife. Agricultural landscapes are disturbed by purposeful human
activity that significantly alters the original character of the landscapes.
The disturbances, while essential or economically advantageous, can
result in changes that concern society. These changes include soil
erosion, increasing dependency on fossil fuels, contamination of soil,
water and crops with agrochemicals, decreased genetic diversity of
major crops and livestock, and reductions in the richness and diversity
of species inhabiting the landscape.
Modern agriculture is now challenged with producing a sustainable
supply of affordable food and fiber in an economically viable manner,
while preserving the short-term and long-term ecological integrity of
the local, regional, and global environment. In an agroecosystem, a
relationship exists between sustainable crop and livestock production;
maintenance of air, soil, and water quality; and diversity of wildlife
and vegetation in noncrop habitats. The degradation of any one
component influences the other components in the agroecosystem and
in the surrounding landscape.
To monitor the condition of this resource, EMAP-Agroecosystems has
divided the resource into four preliminary classes:
• annually-harvested herbaceous crops;
• perennial fruit and nut crops;
• pasture; and
• farm ponds, windbreaks, and other uncultivated agricultural
lands (including fence rows, ditch banks, farm roads, and
farmsteads).
The primary environmental or ecological value identified by EMAP-
Agroecosystems is sustainability —the ability to maintain or enhance
the function of agroecosystems over time.
To address the ecological aspects of sustainability, EMAP-
Agroecosystems is focusing on three social values: productivity; the
quality of air, water, and soil; and biodiversity. The monitoring
program being developed is based upon assessment questions related
to these values. Biotic and abiotic condition indicators, such as crop
productivity or crop production efficiency, soil quality, soil biotic
diversity, insect diversity, and habitat suitability for wildlife, are being
developed and evaluated to address each primary assessment question.
Contributing Institutions
The EMAP-Agroecosystems component is an interagency,
interdisciplinary, ecologically-based effort that represents a developing
partnership between the EPA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture's
Agricultural Research Service (USDA-ARS), National Agricultural
Statistics Service (USDA-NASS), and Soil Conservation Service (USDA-
10
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Available and Upcoming Products
SCS). Faculty and staff of North Carolina State University have also
played an integral role in the genesis of EMAP-Agroecosystem. The
current and increasing commitment from each of these agencies has
enabled the development of a sound scientific basis for EMAP-
Agroecosystems, and will allow for continued progress towards the
conceptual framework and operational infrastructure.
EMAP-Agroecosystems Annual Statistical
Summary—An Hypothetical Example
November 1990
EMAP-Agroecosystems Monitoring and Research April 1991
Strategy:
EMAP Contact
C. Lee Campbell
USDA-ARSAir Quality Program
North Carolina State University
1509 Varsity Drive
Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
(919)515-3311
FY92 Pilot Project In
North Carolina
Figure 6. EMAP and NASS Field Sites
(EMAP-Ag CIS, 1993)
EMAP-Agroecosystems initial pilot field program was conducted in
North Carolina (during 1992). EMAP conducted the pilot cooperatively
with the National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA-NASS) on a
single resource class (annually harvested herbaceous crops, including
vegetables and forages). Indicators selected for the 1992 pilot included
crop productivity, soil quality, land use and landscape structure,
pesticide use, farm pond and well water extent and quality, and a
biological indicator of ozone concentrations. Sampling was done using
the USDA-NASS sampling units (based on square mile—640 acre or
260 hectare—segments), either from 25% of the EMAP hexagon
sampling frame, or from one replicate of the USDA-NASS rotational
panel sampling frame with an average of three fields selected per
segment. The USDA-NASS area frame stratifies segments on the basis
of intensity of agriculture prior to selection, and one-fifth of the
segments rotate out of the sample and are replaced each year. Both the
USDA-NASS and EMAP frames are complete area coverage,
probability-based sampling frames.
A major goal of the 1992 pilot was to. evaluate the USDA-NASS
sampling frame and the EMAP sampling frame in terms of precision of
information obtained and costs. Data were collected at two times. In
June, a survey questionnaire was completed for each field. In mid-
October to mid-December an additional questionnaire was completed
with each grower or operator; soil and water samples were taken. This
pilot is fully described in the FY92 Pilot Project Plan (EMAP-
Agroecosystems, 1993).
Data processing and analysis is continuing for the North Carolina pilot.
The report on the North Carolina pilot will include a data and
statistical summary, a discussion of the indicators tested, the
relationship between the two sampling designs, lessons learned on
logistical and information management issues, and an assessment of
the costs and benefits of working with USDA-NASS.
11
-------
Resource Monitoring and Research
Agroecosystems
Contributing Institutions
Available and Upcoming Products
L/.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistical
Service (USDA-NASS).
USDA-NASS is a full partner with EMAP-Agroecosystems in the design
and implementation of this field monitoring design and survey process
Because USDA-NASS has well-established systems and credibility with
farmers who must be surveyed for agroecosystems monitoring, EMAP
contracts with USDA-NASS to conduct the field surveying in each
state. Similarly, USDA-NASS maintains raw EMAP data under the same
confidentiality procedures which are used for the regular USDA-NASS
surveys, according to a guarantee by Congressional statute.
EMAP-Agroecosystems FY92 Pilot Project Plan October 1993
Report on the FY92 Region IV (North Carolina) December 1993
Pilot Field Program
Special Report to participants on the FY92
Region IV (North Carolina) Pilot Field Program
December 1993
FY93 Pilot Project in
Nebraska
Figure 7. EMAP-Agroecosystems
FY93 Pilot Sites in Nebraska
(EMAP-Ag CIS, 1993)
Contributing Institutions
Field sampling will continue in FY93 with a pilot study in Nebraska.
The pilot is planned as a cooperative program with USDA-NASS and
the Soil Conservation Service, again focusing on annually harvested
herbaceous crops. The primary objective of the pilot—to evaluate
indicators and design issues—resembles that of the FY92 North
Carolina pilot, but focuses on an agricultural landscape that is
ecologically different. Indicators will be similar to those identified for
the first pilot, except that no water sampling will be done, and an
increased emphasis will be placed on soil quality indicators. The
sampling will again test the two different sampling designs, using 25%
of the EMAP hexagons in Nebraska (about 72 locations) and three of
the USDA-NASS replications (about 216 locations) in order to achieve
better distribution of fields across the state and to reduce respondent
burden.
Indicators for use in the Midwest will be developed by evaluating data
collected in the field and assessing the ability of these indicators to
satisfy EMAP indicator criteria and statistical reliability criteria. Data
from the FY92 North Carolina and FY93 Nebraska pilots will be used
to establish initial sample numbers needed on a regional basis to meet
EMAP data quality objectives. The pilot will also compare the USDA-
NASS rotational panel and EMAP hexagon sampling frames in a highly
variable agricultural area for efficiency in terms of cost and reliability
of estimates. Domain estimation techniques will be used to expand
extent estimates to the regional level, and statistical analysis
procedures will be further developed and refined.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistical
Service (USDA-NASS).
USDA-NASS continues its partnership with EMAP-Agroecosystems to
test and implement the field monitoring design and survey process in
Nebraska. USDA-NASS enumerators are also collecting selected field
samples, such as soil condition indicators, for subsequent laboratory
analysis.
12
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Available and Upcoming Products
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service (USDA-
SCS).
USDA-SCS state soil scientists will dig soil pits within each of the soil
map units crossed by the transect across a field used by USDA-NASS
enumerators, in order to obtain soil samples for additional physical
and chemical characterization. This activity is part of the continuing
effort to develop indicators of soil quality and will aid in determining
how soil samples should be taken as well as the parameters that should
be evaluated for EMAP.
North Carolina State University (NCSU), Raleigh, North Carolina.
Lead activity in development of the indicator for soil biotic diversity is
at NCSU. NCSU provides salary support and laboratory facilities for
development of various indicators of biotic diversity.
Region VII (Nebraska) EMAP Agroecosystems
Pilot Plan
October 1993
Conceptual Model and
Assessment Questions
Available and Upcoming Products
The conceptual model for EMAP-Agroecosystems is in development; it
must be formalized, finalized and reviewed through an appropriate
peer review panel. This model will guide further improvements in
EMAP-Agroecosystems, and will focus ongoing development of
assessment questions and condition indicators.
EMAP-Agroecosystems Revised Strategy Plan December 1993
Manuscript for journal article: EMAP- December 1993
Agroecosystems Monitoring Program
Potential Condition
Indicators for
Agroecosystems
This project will explore, develop, and evaluate new condition
indicators for agroecosystems with emphasis on insect diversity,
wildlife, farm ponds, and socioeconomic factors. The project will also
continue development of new soil-quality indicators, with the goal of
selecting several potential research indicators for field testing in FY94,
and shall be responsible for leading development of soil quality
indicators. A review of existing literature and a workshop of experts
will initiate this effort; potential cooperators for indicator development
will be identified through these workshops.
Contributing Institutions
Available and Upcoming Products
North Carolina State University (NCSU), Raleigh, North Carolina.
NCSU provides the leadership and personnel for developing indicators
of soil biotic diversity.
US. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service (USDA-
SCS).
An USDA-SCS soil scientist will join the EMAP Agroecosystems
Resource Group in FY94 as indicator lead for soil quality.
journal Article: Nematode Community Structure
as an Indicator of Soil Biotic Diversity
Report on insect indicators available for use in
monitoring agroecosystems
December, 1993
December 1993
13
-------
Resource Monitoring and Research
Agroecosystems
FY94 Demonstration
and Pilot Field Projects
Contributing Institutions:
Available and Upcoming Products
EMAP-Agroecosystemswill engage in a Pilot Field Program in
Regions IV (North Carolina) and VII (Nebraska) in FY94. Indicator
development will be the primary goal of each of the pilots with
emphasis on the resource classes of annually harvested herbaceous
crops in both pilot areas, and windbreaks in Region VII only. Specific
new indicator field programs in Region VII will concentrate on the
condition or suitability of windbreaks adjacent to agricultural fields as
habitat for wildlife. In Region IV, emphasis will be on monitoring
insect biodiversity in fields, in border areas around fields, and in farm
ponds. Other indicators of soil quality, crop productivity, and land use
will also be used in each pilot.
An opportunity also exists to coordinate EMAP-Agroecosystems
activities with those of the EMAP groups for Surface Waters, Forest
Health Monitoring, Landscapes, Landscape Characterization,
Indicators, and Assessment and Reporting in the Mid-Atlantic
Highlands Assessment (MAHA) project being implemented by EPA
Region III. If funds are available, EMAP-Agroecosystems, with USDA-
NASS and USDA-SCS, is planning to participate in the MAHA project
as a field demonstration for FY94. (See the discussion of this Regional-
EMAP project in Section 4 of this document.)
U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistical
Service (USDA-NASS).
USDA-NASS will continue to conduct the field monitoring for the
Region III demonstration and for the Region IV and VII pilot field
projects.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service (USDA-
SCS).
The USDA-SCS will support the soils components of the demonstration
and pilot monitoring projects.
EPA Region III.
Environmental Services Division of EPA Region III is coordinating a
comprehensive environmental monitoring and assessment process for
the Mid-Atlantic Highlands.
North Carolina and Nebraska Pilot Plans for
1994
June 1994
Mid-Atlantic Highlands Demonstration Plan
June 1994
14
-------
£MA? ?m)ecl Descriptions
September 1993
Introduction
2.2 Arid Ecosystems
Arid ecosystems are terrestrial systems characterized by a climatic
regime where the potential evapotranspiration exceeds precipitation,
annual precipitation ranges from less than 5 cm to 60 cm (2 to 24
inches), and air temperatures range from -40° to +50° Celsius (-40° to
122°F). Arid ecosystems include desert scrub, grasslands, prairies,
chaparral, open woodland, alpine tundra, and associated riparian
communities, but exclude intensively managed agriculture such as
irrigated farmlands. Arid ecosystems formerly occupied nearly 40
percent of the conterminous area of the United States. Additionally,
arid ecosystems include the Arctic Desert of Alaska. About 65 percent
of the arid ecosystems in the 11 western states are in public ownership.
The EMAP-Arid Ecosystems program (EMAP-Arid) is evaluating and
selecting indicators of arid ecosystem condition relative to three
important social values—productivity, biotic diversity and aesthetics.
Condition indicators of productivity will include estimates of net
primary productivity (NPP) and changes in NPP. For instance, changes
in photosynthetic activity relative to environmental stress will be
measured from remotely placed sensors (aircraft or satellites), which
can evaluate spectral reflectance via statistical comparisons such as
Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI). Possible biotic
diversity indicators include vegetation composition, abundance and
structure. Aesthetic values will be addressed using fractal dimensions,
connectivity, and other indicators of landscape patterns.
EMAP-Arid initiated field research in 1992 with a pilot study in the
Colorado Plateau (comprising parts of the states of Arizona, Colorado,
New Mexico and Utah) in 1992. The pilot evaluated indicators,
logistic feasibility, and the relation between field data and remotely
sensed information. EMAP-Arid also has developed a Desertification
Susceptibility Index as an example of how EMAP condition and
stressor indicators can be used to assess ecological conditions at a
regional scale.
15
-------
Resource Monitoring and Research
Arid Ecosystems
Contributing Institutions U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (USDA-FS).
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service (USDA-
SCS).
U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM).
U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS).
U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service (NFS).
University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.
University of Nevada, Desert Research Institute, Biological Sciences
Center, Reno, Nevada.
Navajo Nation, Window Rock, Arizona.
Grand Canyon Trust, Flagstaff, Arizona.
Society for Range Management, Steering Committee on Unity and
Concepts and Technology, Brookings, South Dakota.
Available and Upcoming Products
EMAP Contact:
Arid Ecosystems Strategic Monitoring Plan
June 1991
Arid Colorado Plateau Pilot Study—1992,
Implementation Plan
January 1993
Remote Sensing Techniques in the Analysis of
Change Detection. D.A. Mouat, C.C. Mahin,J.
Lancaster
Ceocarto
International (2)
1993: pp. 39-50.
Colorado Plateau Pilot Study Fact Sheet
June 1992
The Spectral Indicator Fact Sheet
September 1993
Remote Sensing Examination and Assessment of
the Upper San Pedro River Watershed, Arizona
December 1993
William G. Kepner
U.S. EPA Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
(702)798-2193
GIS Technology
Integrated with
Condition Indicators
Desertification is considered a significant process of land degradation
in arid, semi-arid and subhumid ecosystems because it results in a loss
of productivity and diversity. The causes of desertification often
include human activities related to land use, and its impacts can be
exacerbated by climatic events such as long-term drought. This
initiative proposes using Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer
(AVHRR) imagery and sample-based datasets to develop indicators
(e.g., of climate, erosion potential, grazing pressure, forage potential)
which collectively could be integrated into a model to assess
desertification. Because geographic information systems (GIS) is a tool
which can evaluate and correlate spatial data crucial to desertification
studies, GIS can provide an opportunity to explore integration of
indicator data.
16
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Available and Upcoming Products
Integrating CIS technology with condition indicators will facilitate
plans for the required demonstration-level study on desertification of
the Colorado Plateau scheduled by EMAP-Arid for FY95.
Desertification Susceptibility User Interface
(CIS Software)
November 1993
Workgroup on Nominal
or Subnominal
Ecological Condition
Available and Upcoming Products
Under this project, EMAP-Arid will continue its focus on problems
related to desertification by convening a workgroup of university and
EPA scientists. This workgroup will determine condition thresholds
which relate to nominal, marginal, and subnominal categories for
selected indicators of rangeland condition. Through the Committee on
Unity and Concepts and Technology of the Society for Range
Management, an international, professional association of range
scientists, the workgroup will explore how certain ecological indicator
results can, separately and in combination, be partitioned into
condition classes. EMAP-Arid's focus is the development of ranking
criteria related to indicators of susceptibility to desertification,
particularly those that can be employed on a regional scale. Although
EMAP-Arid is specifically interested in the four states which comprise
the Colorado Plateau, the workgroup will broaden its activity
throughout the eleven western states.
"Multidimensiona I Monitoring for Assessing
Sustainability of Arid Ecosystems./' in
Proceedings of the 25th International
Symposium on Remote Sensing and Global
Environmental Change. Breckenridge, R.P., W.
C. Kepner, D. A. Mouat.
September 1993
Indicator Plot Design
Pilot Study
EMAP-Arid has identified and placed priorities on a number of
research indicators, only a few of which have been subjected to field
testing. An evaluation of suitable plot sizes and shapes is required for
the array of measurements currently under study within the EMAP-Arid
indicator categories of vegetation, soil properties, and spectral
measurements. This project will determine the optimum field plot size
and shape for selected indicator measures within arid ecosystems by
conducting uniformity trials with nested plot designs in three EMAP-
Arid resource classes, followed by a determination of plot size and
shape variances. Information derived from the pilot study will be
crucial to developing a regional demonstration study for the entire
Colorado Plateau in FY95.
Available and Upcoming Products
Field Operations and Training Manual
September 1993
Quality Assurance Manual
September 1993
Final Implementation Plan
May 1994
17
-------
Resource Monitoring and Research
Estuaries
Introduction
2.3 Estuaries
Estuaries are semi-enclosed bodies of water where freshwater mixes
with seawater. Estuaries include fjords, bays, inlets, sounds, lagoons
and tidal rivers. The outer boundary is the coastal waters, and the
inland boundary is the limit of tidal influence. The important role
estuaries play in sustaining the health and abundance of marine fishes,
shellfish, and birds has long been recognized. The EMAP-Estuaries data
collection program was initiated in 1990 with a demonstration project
in the Virginian Province which stretches from Cape Henry to Cape
Cod on the mid-Atlantic coast. Since 1990, EMAP-Estuaries has
continued the collection of monitoring information in the Virginian
Province on an annual basis (rotating among a series of sites
distributed throughout the estuaries of the Province, based on EMAP-
Estuaries' adaptation of the EMAP design methods). In 1991, EMAP-
Estuaries began monitoring in the Louisianian Province (the Gulf Coast
from the Mexican Border to the panhandle of Florida), including the
modification and calibration of indicators for the diverse conditions of
the Gulf Coast. Since inception monitoring has continued in the
Louisianian Province.
In 1993, pilot monitoring activities will begin in the Carolinian
Province, with responsibilities for managing the provincial monitoring
residing with the Strategic Assessment Branch of NOAA, a close
collaborator with EMAP-Estuaries throughout the program. Analysis,
review, writing, and publication of summarized monitoring data, and
the results of pilot studies in the Virginian Province and elsewhere will
lead to a number of publications. EMAP-Estuaries has also amassed a
considerable volume of monitoring data, which is nearly ready for
release to the public, and which has already been shared with a
number of collaborators such as EPA's Chesapeake Bay Program.
In addition to "internal" monitoring and assessment activities, EMAP-
Estuaries has developed an aggressive outreach program for actual and
potential users of EMAP-Estuaries information. This effort has been well
received by EPA regional offices and many of the larger coastal and
estuaries programs which have their own responsibilities for long-term
monitoring and assessment. A variety of collaborative efforts are
underway to share efforts and data to maximize mutual benefits.
EMAP-Estuaries has also invested considerable efforts in sharing design
and methods expertise with other groups.
EMAP Contact
J. Kevin Summers
U.S. EPA Environmental Research Laboratory
1 Sabine Island Drive
Gulf Breeze, FL 32561
Telephone: 904/934-9244
Program and
Operations Center
The Program and Operations Center is designed to provide EMAP-
Estuaries with support for planning and coordinating its entire research
and monitoring program. The Center also conducts assessment and
evaluation activities.
18
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
. . .»-—~^ X
isianian yvwfcst
Indian
Figure 8. Biogeographical
Provinces of Estuaries
(EMAP Draft Program Guide, 1993)
The Center will conduct assessments and prepare special reports to
address EMAP-Estuaries questions on societal, regulatory, scientific,
management, and policy issues. In addition, the Center provides
EMAP-Estuaries with the statistical and design services required to
conduct its monitoring and assessment functions using a probability-
based design compatible with EMAP's major design components.
The Program and Operations Center will perform a variety of
additional functions, including reviewing and preparing reports,
evaluating the results of technical workshops, and preparing briefing
materials. The Program Center will provide support for contaminant
assessments, evaluations of indicator response across the Virginian and
Louisianian Provinces, and development of an indicator and sampling
design strategy for 5-year implementation. The Program Center also
will analyze data from the Virginian and Louisianian Provinces to
determine the advantages of random vs. systematic site location;
develop a classification scheme for large estuaries, small estuaries, and
tidal rivers; conduct power analyses using existing and model-based
strategies; and refine the confidence interval approach used to date.
Cooperating Institutions
Available and Upcoming Products
Estuarine Research Federation (ERF).
The ERF provides a high level of peer review to EMAP-Estuaries,
ranging from continuing review of the group's research plan, to review
of the monitoring plans and assessment reports from each of the
group's province-based regional demonstration projects.
University of Rhode Island (URI) Kingston, Rl.
URI manages the field monitoring phases of EMAP-Estuaries activities
in the Virginian Province.
U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS).
FWS has supplied laboratory analytical and research support for
indicator development and assessment planning.
U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA).
NOAA is a full partner in many aspects of the EMAP-Estuaries design,
monitoring and assessment processes, including the management of
future Carolinian Province monitoring.
Cross-Province Indicator Evaluation Report September 1993
Annual Report on Available CIS Analytical
Functions
September 1993
EMAP-Estuaries Indicator and Design Strategy September 1993
19
-------
Resource Monitoring and Research
Estuaries
Virginian Province
Figure 9. States of the Virginian Province—
Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras
The Virginian Province includes Long Island Sound, Delaware Bay,
and Chesapeake Bay. Monitoring of estuarine areas in this province
began in 1990, and addresses the four main contributors to overall
estuarine condition defined by EMAP: ecosystem quality, biotic
integrity, consumptive uses, and non-consumptive uses.
Specific steps that EMAP-Estuaries will take in the Virginian Province
include
• continuing field sampling (including water quality, benthic,
and fin fish abundance measures);
• processing and evaluating benthic infauna samples;
• characterizing sediments;
• processing and evaluating 1993 sediment contaminants;
• assessing 1993 fish pathology, and sediment toxicity;
• providing automated data processing support for the
management of 1992-and 1993 data;
• conducting statistical analyses of 1992 data;
• reporting the findings of the 1992 monitoring effort;
• publishing manuscripts of the results of the 1991 and 1992
Virginian Province activities; and
• performing quality control and quality assurance at all levels
of the province's program.
In 1993, the Virginian Province will continue and expand interactions
with other federal and state activities, including EPA's Chesapeake Bay
Program, the Maryland/Delaware Inland Bays Program, Region ll's
R-EMAP project, states and the EPA Regional Offices. The Virginian
Province research plan also will expand technology transfer efforts by
sponsoring a Virginian Province User Network Workshop,
participating in EMAP-Estuaries research indicator workshops, and
participating in an EPA Region III indicator workshop.
Cooperating Institutions
Available and Upcoming Products
EPA Chesapeake Bay Program, Annapolis, MD.
EMAP-Estuaries and the Chesapeake Bay Program have embarked on a
number of joint activities, including common monitoring stations for
dissolved oxygen, an attempt to reconcile differing benthic monitoring
methods, and collaboration on several other data-sharing activities.
EPA Maryland/Delaware Inland Bays Program.
The Inland Bays program is adapting EMAP techniques to perform
detailed studies of water quality and associated land use.
EPA New York/New Jersey Harbor Estuary Program.
Supported by a R-EMAP grant from EMAP, The NY/NJ Harbors Estuary
Program is cooperating with EMAP-Estuaries in monitoring activities.
Statistical Summary for 1992 Data Collection
September 1993
Training Manuals
July 1993
1993 Data Base
September 1993
20
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Louisianian Province
Figure 10. States of the Louisianian
Province—Texas to Florida
The Louisianian Province comprises the Gulf of Mexico coastal areas
of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and the Florida Panhandle.
Demonstration monitoring in this area began in 1991. Monitoring in
the Louisianian Province addresses the four main contributors of
overall estuarine condition: ecosystem quality, biotic integrity,
consumptive uses, and non-consumptive uses. To monitor and assess
these contributors accurately, the province will conduct
• continuing field sampling (including water quality, benthic,
and fin fish abundance measures);
• processing and evaluating benthic infauna samples ;
• characterizing sediments ;
• processing and evaluating 1993 sediment contaminants ;
• assessing 1993 fish pathology, and 1993 sediment toxicity
• providing automated data processing support for the
management of 1992 and 1993 data;
• conducting statistical analyses of 1992 data;
• reporting the findings of the 1992 monitoring effort;
• publishing manuscripts of the results of 1991 and 1992
Louisianian Province activities; and
• performing quality control and quality assurance at all levels
of the province's program.
The Louisiana Province will continue and expand its interactions with
other Gulf of Mexico activities. These interactive efforts are important
in developing joint assessments and participating in technology
transfer. The Gulf of Mexico Program, EPA Regions IV and VI, NOAA
National Status and Trends (NS&T) Program and the Gulf States are
among the entities which will work with the Province on its monitoring
and assessment activities.
Contributing Institutions
Available and Upcoming Products
NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Gulf Coast Regional
Laboratory.
The National Marine Fisheries Service Regional Laboratory is providing
ongoing support to EMAP-Estuaries in the areas of indicator
development and assessment planning and reporting.
Texas A&M University and the University of Mississippi.
Both universities are supplying services to analyze monitoring samples.
In addition, Texas A&M coordinates much of the field monitoring.
Training Manuals
May 1993
1992 Statistical Summary
August 1993
1993 Statistical Summary
June 1994
21
-------
Resource Monitoring and Research
Estuaries
Carolinian Province
Figure 11. States of the Carolinian
Province—Cape Hatteras to Cape Canaveral
The Carolinian Province includes coastal and estuarine areas of the
East Coast of the United States from Cape Hatteras to the Indian River
Lagoon in northern Florida. Extensive areas of tidal salt marshes and
mud flats are ecological features that distinguish this province from the
Virginian and Louisianian Provinces. Research in the Carolinian
Province provides EMAP with the opportunity to identify region-
specific problems of this unique area.
In the Carolinian Province, EMAP will refine assessment questions and
monitoring technologies and will develop joint strategies to meet
information needs of EPA and NOAA. A proposed pilot study in the
province will accelerate the development of an interagency program to
assess the condition of the Nation's marine resources and will combine
EPA's EMAP-Estuaries and NOAA's National Status and Trends (NS&T)
into a unified planning and management entity.
In 1993, EMAP-Estuaries will plan and prepare for full-scale
implementation of monitoring activities in the province by developing
the sampling design and logistical plans. EMAP-Estuaries will then be
able to refine assessment questions to focus on region-specific issues,
and calibrate EMAP-Estuaries indicators to unique Carolinian Province
physical and biological conditions. The program in the province also
will assess the feasibility of incorporating measures offish population
condition into EMAP-Estuaries assessments and will develop and
calibrate indicators of shellfish population condition.
Since tidal wetlands constitute a vital component of this province,
EMAP will develop indicators to map the extent and condition of tidal
wetlands and submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV). The Carolinian
Province team will conduct a joint wetlands and estuaries workshop to
review the findings of the Louisianian wetland pilot project, develop
areal estimates for the Carolinian Province, evaluate submerged
aquatic vegetation and tidal marsh productivity, biomass, and other
indicators of tidal marsh condition, and evaluate one or more faunal
indicators that reflect critical functions of the tidal marshes in the
Carolinian Province.
EMAP-Estuaries will conduct indicator development and user
workshops; participate in regional and state coordinated workshops;
and develop field operations and logistics manuals and a quality
assurance plan for implementing a monitoring demonstration project
for next year. The Province team also will evaluate existing data on
dissolved oxygen, collect new data, calibrate the benthic community
indicators developed in the Virginian and Louisianian Provinces, as
well as collect and review pertinent scientific literature. For fish
population indicators, the Carolinian Province will determine the
feasibility of developing a multi-species compositional index and in
order to classify Carolinian estuaries into different fish habitats. The
province group also will review data from nearshore juvenile fish
surveys and will identify methods to measure pollution loadings and
land use in the Carolinian Province.
Also in 1993, EMAP-Estuaries in the Carolinian Province will identify
and measure selected point and non-point source pollution loadings
for the province's estuaries, and will identify available information on
land use and land cover in the Carolinian Province.
22
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Contributing Institutions
National Marine Fisheries Service Regional Laboratories,
Charleston, South Carolina.
South Carolina Marine Resources Division, Columbia, South Carolina.
University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina.
University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia.
Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
23
-------
Resource Monitoring and Research
Forest Health Monitoring
Introduction
2.4 Forest Health Monitoring
Forests cover approximately one-third of the United States and are an
important part of the United States economy, culture, and ecology.
EMAP follows USDA's definition of forests: Forest land has at least
10% of its surface area covered by trees of any size or formerly having
had such trees as cover and not currently built-up or developed for
agricultural use. In response to legislative mandates and concerns for
our environment, several government agencies have been working
together to develop a program to monitor the condition of the Nation's
forests. This multi-agency effort, called the Forest Health Monitoring
(FHM) program is jointly funded by the EMAP-Forest Health
Monitoring resource group (EMAP-FHM) and the U.S. Forest Service.
Other contributing agencies and groups include the National
Association of State Foresters and individual state forestry agencies, the
Tennessee Valley Authority, the USDA Soil Conservation Service, the
U.S. Department of Interior's Bureau of Land Management, Fish and
Wildlife Service, and the National Park Service.
Increasing concern about documented and potential effects of air
pollutants, global climate change, and a variety of insect, disease, and
other interacting stressors on forest ecosystems has been the motivation
behind Forest Health Monitoring. The FHM program is designed to
help resource managers and policy makers manage the Nation's forest
resources, allocate funds for research and development, and evaluate
environmental policy.
When fully implemented, the Forest Health Monitoring program will
include three levels of monitoring. The most general and widespread
activity, and the one in which EPA and the Forest Service are full
partners, is termed Detection Monitoring. This effort is currently being
conducted on more than 700 sites every year in 14 states by the state
forestry agencies, with indicators based primarily on tree growth,
visual leaf and canopy crown rating, and bioindicator plants.
In addition to Detection Monitoring, EMAP-FHM is conducting two
demonstration projects in the East to expand the range of forest
condition indicators used in Detection Monitoring, and to test the
application of the EMAP sampling design. One demonstration is
located in the southeastern loblolly-shortleaf pine forests. The second
demonstration is being conducted in collaboration with the Southern
Appalachian Man and the Biosphere (SAMAB) Program and the
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) to test biological indicators in the
Southern Appalachians and to experiment with various modes of
integrated ecological assessment.
EMAP Contact:
Samuel A. Alexander (EPA)
c/o Southeastern Forest Experiment Station
USDA Forest Service
PO Box 12254
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
(919) 549-4020
24
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Detection Monitoring
Figure 12. Detection Monitoring States
(EMAP-FHM Issue Plan, 1993)
Cooperating Institutions:
The location of the Detection Monitoring network on the EMAP
sampling grid has been an important basis for cooperation in
establishing the interagency Forest Health Monitoring program.
Detection Monitoring field work is funded by the Forest Service.
EMAP-FHM supports the field work with information management,
quality assurance, and data assessment services. Extensive data sets
developed in Detection Monitoring have led to the development of
assessment strategies and integration with auxiliary data. The data have
been used to demonstrate the effectiveness of the EMAP design and to
evaluate new design options.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (USDA-FS).
USDA-FS works closely with participating state foresters to conduct
field sampling, interact with land owners, and assimilate FHM results
in state forest management practices. USDA-FS personnel also help
plan and carry out program activities in key areas such as indicator
development, quality assurance, information management, and
assessment.
State Forestry Agencies. -
State forestry agencies hire an.d supervise the Detection'Monitoring
field crews in the 14 states where Detection Monitoring is currently
being conducted.
Available and Upcoming Products 7992 Annual Statistical Summary
October 1993
Southeastern Loblolly-
Shortleaf Pine
Demonstration
EMAP-FHM is collecting indicator data from the 1993 rotation plots on
the EMAP sampling grid in the loblolly-shortleaf pine forests of
Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. Indicators
under evaluation are site condition, growth and regeneration, visual
crown rating, damage and mortality, foliar chemistry, soil productivity,
stemwood chemistry, vegetation structure, lichen community and
chemistry, dendrochronology, air pollution bioindicators, and root
disease. Also during FY93, EMAP-FHM will produce an interim report
to assess the indicator data collected in FY92. The potential use of the
indicators as core indicators for regional assessment will be evaluated
following the two-year demonstration .
The demonstration project addresses the following questions:
• How do different indices compare in their ability to identify forest
ecosystems in subnominal condition?
• What is the ratio of total measurement error to natural and spatial
variability on a regional scale?
• Is there a correlation between regional patterns in condition
indicators and regional natural or anthropogenic stresses (e.g.,
climate, incidence of pests, air pollution, and land management
practices)?
• What is the temporal variability of the index period (June-August)
and how does this compare to data quality objectives for the
detection of meaningful trends in the indicators?
« What are the operational characteristics (e.g., time expenditure,
difficulty of measurement, equipment and manpower require-
ments, impact on the plot, and laboratory analysis costs) of
proposed condition indicators?
25
-------
Resource Monitoring and Research
Forest Health Monitoring
Cooperating Institutions
Available and Upcoming Products
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (USDA-FS).
USDA-FS personnel serve as lead scientists for several indicators. They
have major responsibilities for field crew training, quality assurance,
data analysis and assessment, and reporting activities.
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA).
TVA is responsible for providing logistics support for field training and
monitoring activities.
State Forestry Agencies.
State forestry agencies in Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and
Georgia are responsible for locating plots and obtaining landowner
permission.
State Soil Conservation Service Offices in Virginia, North Carolina,
South Carolina, and Georgia.
The state soil conservation Service offices provide soil scientists to
collect soil data.
7.992 Annual Statistical Summary October 1993
1993 Annual Statistical Summary
August 1994
Complete Report on Two-Year Demonstration
August 1994
Southern Appalachian
Man and the Biosphere
Project
The ecological resources of the Southern Appalachian Man and the
Biosphere (SAMAB) Reserve have been recognized internationally
through UNESCO's Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Program. The
reserve encompasses a region of high biodiversity representing a mixed
mesophytic ecosystem. The SAMAB project complements the
southeastern loblolly-shortleaf pine demonstration by allowing
scientists to field test and evaluate indicators in a different and highly
diverse type of forest ecosystem. This cooperative effort between
EMAP-FHM and the SAMAB consortium opens the way for future
cooperation between SAMAB and other EMAP resource and cross-
cutting groups, including Surface Waters, Agroecosystems,
Landscapes, and Landscape Characterization.
Cooperating Institutions:
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA).
TVA will share costs for this demonstration project with EMAP.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service (USDA-
SCS).
USDA-SCS is providing information resources and technical advice on
soils-related components of the demonstration.
Sfafe Forestry Agencies
State forestry agencies in Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, South
Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia are responsible for locating plots,
obtaining landowner permission and providing assessment advice for
the demonstration.
University of Tennessee (UT), Nashville, Tennessee.
UT provides logistics and field staff support to the SAMAB
demonstration project.
26
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Available and Upcoming Products SAMAB Project Report (1992 Data)
August 1993
27
-------
Resource Monitoring and Research
Great Lake:
Introduction
2.5 Great Lakes
The Great Lakes basin is one of the largest freshwater ecosystems in
the world and the most intensively used freshwater resource in North
America. The key environmental issues facing the Great Lakes are
• point and non-point source nutrient control,
• toxic substance control,
• remedial programs,
• inadequate information,
• science policy and allocation of research resources ,and
• need to define an effective ecosystem approach to planning
for Great Lakes management.
Four of the five Great Lakes are regulated by legislation developed in
Canada and the United States, whereas the fifth, Lake Michigan, lies
entirely in the United States. The management, protection, and
development of the Great Lakes is under the jurisdiction of two federal
governments, the province of Ontario, and eight U.S. states, along with
numerous municipal, provincial, state, federal, regional, and
international agencies.
EMAP-Great Lakes (EMAP-GL) will evaluate the condition of the lakes
with respect to three social values: biotic integrity, trophic condition,
and fishability. As a surrogate measure for overall biotic integrity,
EMAP-GL will focus on three major types of indicators: bentnic
macroinvertebrates, primary producers, and fish. EMAP-GL is being
designed to report on the overall condition of each individual Great
Lake. In addition, four population groups have been identified for
special analytical attention because they have distinctive physical
characteristics: offshore areas, nearshore areas, harbors and bays, and
wetlands.
Pilot monitoring activities began in Lakes Superior and Michigan in
1992, and will continue as pilots through 1993, with specific attention
to nearshore waters and testing of fish indicators. EMAP-GL will also
be working with EMAP-Wetlands to design a wetlands monitoring pilot
project.
EMAP Contact
Diatoms: Indicators of
Biotic Integrity and
Trophic Status
Steve Lozano
U.S. EPA Environmental Research Laboratory
6201 Congdon Boulevard
Duluth, MN 55804
(218)720-5594
EMAP-GL will assess the method and frequency for future monitoring
of diatom populations. The effort will focus on sediment trap samples
because the method affords time-integration samples, does not require
an index period, and the collection time period is known. The study
will allow an assessment of the feasibility of the sediment trap method.
If the sediment trap method is unacceptable, the short core method
will be employed. This will lead to the overall formulation of EMAP-
GL's strategy for diatom populations.
28
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Cooperating Institutions University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA).
Benthic Communities in
Lake Michigan
Benthic communities are major elements of the Great Lakes index of
biotic integrity. Benthic communities can be used to determine the
impact of contaminants and habitat modification in the Great Lakes.
For this pilot project, EMAP-GL will sample over 60 near-shore and 12
offshore stations to determine the condition of the benthic
communities, the sediment toxicity, physical conditions of the
sediments, and the chemical contaminant content. This project will
allow EMAP-GL to
• classify benthic invertebrate community assemblages according to
environmental conditions as one approach to determining nominal
conditions;
• examine annual, seasonal, and operator variability in the methods;
and
• investigate spatial variance in benthic community structure in the
offshore resource class.
Cooperating Institutions National Water Research Laboratory of Environment Canada, Toronto.
U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA).
Sampling for Fish in the
Great Lakes
Fish are a major component of the Great Lakes ecosystem due to their
roles as major predators, as potential controlling factors in community
structure, and as the source of significant economic income. Fish are
an important aspect of determining biotic integrity; lake trout and
walleye populations have been proposed as indicators of overall
ecosystem condition. Estimates of lake trout currently are determined
by the states while forage fish sampling is conducted by the Fish and
Wildlife Service. Although the results of these monitoring programs are
usually reported on a lakewide basis, none of the current sampling
programs is based on a probability design. EMAP-GL will work with
FWS to explore data from existing fish assessment programs and
conduct pilot studies on alternative sample designs and indicators that
will allow estimates of environmental condition with known
confidence.
Cooperating Institutions U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service
Nearshore Sampling in
Lake Michigan
Although indicators of trophic status have been routinely monitored in
the Great Lakes for over 15 years, this monitoring focused almost
entirely on offshore areas of the lakes. Thus, there is little information
on the temporal and spatial variability of these indicators in nearshore
areas of the lakes. Similarly, little systematic evaluation of spatial and
temporal variations in benthic communities has been conducted.
EMAP-GL will initiate a cooperative agreement to sample and evaluate
measures of biotic integrity and trophic status in the nearshore
29
-------
Resource Monitoring and Research
Great Lakes
resource class of Lake Michigan. Indicators of benthic community
composition and trophic status will be measured during several
seasons at proposed EMAP nearshore probability sample locations.
These locations will also provide data to investigate alternative class
boundaries that have been proposed based on combinations of depth
and distance from shoreline. This project will allow EMAP-GL to
• determine the spatial and temporal variability of indicators of
benthic community composition in the nearshore resource class of
Lake Michigan,
• determine the spatial and temporal variability of indicators of
trophic status in nearshore Lake Michigan, and
• evaluate the impact of various proposed boundaries between the
offshore and nearshore resource classes on estimates of conditions.
Offshore Pilot
Monitoring for Trophic
Status in
Lake Michigan and
Lake Superior
Trophic status is one of the primary research issues for EMAP-Great
Lakes. Measurements of trophic status have been the focus of historical
and existing monitoring programs through a binational agreement
between the U.S. and Canada. EMAP-GL will collect samples during
the spring and summer from offshore sampling stations in Lake
Michigan and Lake Superior using probability-based sampling
designed to produce statements of offshore trophic status with known
confidence. Samples will measure chlorophyll, particulate organic
carbon nutrients, and optical characteristics. This project will permit
EMAP-GL to
• determine the trophic status of the offshore resource class of Lakes
Michigan and Superior using existing limnological indicators,
• evaluate the index period by comparing estimates of trophic status
in spring and summer sampling periods with historical data,
• identify potential indicators of biotic integrity and trophic status for
nearshore areas of both lakes,
• determine the temporal and inter-lake variability of indicators, and
• evaluate the impact of proposed resource class boundaries on
estimates of condition.
30
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
2.6 Landscapes
Introduction
Landscape ecology is the study of the spatial interactions of ecological
resources at scales ranging from a few millimeters to several kilometers
(Golley 1987). The bounding or classification of landscapes into units
is based on the scale and boundaries of landscape processes and
questions being addressed. EMAP-Landscapes uses the emerging
discipline of landscape ecology to organize information on ecological
condition at the regional level. For land cover-related processes such
as succession and biotic composition and flow, EMAP-Landscapes
applies Forman and Godron's (1986) definition of a landscape: "a
heterogeneous land area composed of a cluster of interacting
ecosystems that is repeated in similar form throughout." For water-
related processes and monitoring questions, a landscape is defined as a
watershed or basin.
Because landscape patterns are thought to reflect ecological processes
operating within and among ecological resources, these patterns
provide a set of indicators that can be used to address ecological status
and trends at a variety of scales. Landscape patterns are an important
determinant of the intrinsic stability and sustainability of certain
ecological processes. These processes, in turn, result in production and
sustainability of ecological goods and services. These services include
the provision of water—of suitable quality, in desired quantities, and at
the appropriate times—as well as the production of food, fiber, timber,
and other valued products.
The primary benefit to EMAP of this approach is a framework for
addressing status and trends in ecological values that transcend several
scales and ecological resource categories, including biological
diversity, water quality, quantity and timing, and productivity.
EMAP-Landscapes is proposing a five-step monitoring approach,
beginning with an initial status determination from Landsat Multi-
Spectral Scanner data (Step 1). Yearly change detection analyses would
derive primarily from the AVHRR (Step 2), with five-year change
detection analyses using trend information from AVHRR imagery plus
ancillary data from other monitoring programs such as the USDA Soil
Conservation Service's Natural Resources Inventory (Step 3). Ten-year
resamples of landscape status and determination of change or trends
would employ MSS or Landsat-Thematic Mapper™ data (Step 4).
Finally, more detailed assessments of areas undergoing change, as
determined by Steps 2-4, would take place as needed (Step 5).
First among major activities for EMAP-Landscapes is the development
of a detailed research plan for this approach; followed by a peer
review. Additionally, EMAP-Landscapes is focusing on technical and
operational issues that must be resolved to implement a landscape
monitoring program, including specifically:
• identifying landscape values and assessment questions;
• developing conceptual models;
• identifying and testing landscape indicators; and
• identifying landscape units to be monitored.
31
-------
Resource Monitoring and Research
Landscapes
EMAP Contact:
K. Bruce Jones
U.S. EPA Environmental Systems Laboratory
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas , NV 89123-3478
(702) 798-2671
Landscape Monitoring
Approach
To meet its objectives, EMAP-Landscapes is developing a
comprehensive multi-year monitoring strategy that is based primarily
on remote sensing data. Since change detection will be an important
part of this approach, close cooperation is anticipated with the North
American Landscape Classification Consortium (NALC), a joint effort of
EPA, the National Atmospheric and Space Administration (NASA), and
USGS. Close coordination with EMAP-Landscape Characterization is
also anticipated, since this component is establishing standards and
approaches for use of spatial information in EMAP.
EMAP-Landscapes is developing a research plan that describes an
approach to monitoring landscape status and trends relative to specific
societal values. In addition to proposing a comprehensive monitoring
strategy for landscapes, the plan will identify key research and
development issues that must be resolved in order to implement the
proposed approach, and will recommend approaches and strategies for
resolving these issues. The research plan and proposed strategy will
undergo an external peer review. Parts of the plan will also be
submitted for publication in journals.
Cooperating Institutions
University of Nevada,Desert Research Institute, Reno, Nevada.
The Institute is developing strategies and approaches for the change
detection portion of the overall approach, especially as they relate to
remote sensing science.
North American Landscape Classification Consortium (NALC).
NALC, a joint effort among EPA, NASA, and USCS, is providing
coordination of imagery acquisition schedules for Landsat-TM™ and
MSS, and collaboration on change detection techniques and issues of
spatial data quality assurance.
U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL),
Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
ORNL is providing technical leadership for the overall landscape
monitoring approach, especially in the areas of landscape indicators,
conceptual models and assessments.
University of Ottawa, Canada.
The university is providing refinement of societal values to be
addressed in the monitoring program, as well as assessment questions
and conceptual models.
University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.
The University of Arizona is providing methods and approaches for
large-scale monitoring using remote sensing.
University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico
UNM is developing innovative techniques for analyzing landscape
indicators at multiple-scales that have been developed in conjunction
with work on the Sevietta Long-term Ecological Research (LTER) site.
32
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Available and Upcoming Products
University of California -Santa Barbara
UCSB is developing innovative techniques for dealing with spatial data
analysis.
Tennessee Valley, Authority (TVA)
TVA is applying procedures and approaches for sampling designs and
analysis of landscapes.
Research Strategy to Implement a National
Landscape Monitoring Program
December 1993
Landscape Values and
Conceptual Models
Cooperating Institutions
EMAP uses a values-driven approach to develop its monitoring
components. This involves identification of social values, formulation
of assessment questions, development of conceptual models that relate
to identified values, testing and selection of indicators, evaluation of
sampling design options, and development of implementation
specifics. Value identification and refinement and development of
conceptual models are critical in developing the overall program and
in selecting indicators. EMAP-Landscapes has identified three primary
types of values:
• biological diversity,
• water quality, quantity and timing, and
• socio-economics, including aesthetics.
Research is needed to characterize these values more fully, as well as
to identify other social values relevant to the landscape monitoring
program. Additionally, a set of assessment questions relative to each
value must be formulated. EMAP-Landscapes proposes an extensive
literature search, and a series of workshops and meetings with
technical experts and environmental managers.
EMAP-Landscapes is currently developing a series of conceptual
models for landscapes. This series will likely include four fundamental
processes occurring within and among landscape scales: biotic,
nutrient, energy, and water flows and fluxes. EMAP-Landscapes will
develop these models from existing literature or data on landscapes as
they relate to landscape values, and through workshops and meetings.
U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL),
Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
Landscape scientists from ORNL are providing leadership in
developing conceptual models for this project and are taking the lead
on writing the journal article.
University of Ottawa, Canada.
A university cooperator is conducting an extensive literature search on
landscape values and is organizing workshops to refine landscape
values. The university also has the lead for writing a journal article.
Tennessee Valley Authority.
TVA is assisting in the development of conceptual models for
biological diversity in landscapes.
33
-------
Resource Monitor ing and Research
Landscapes
Available and Upcoming Products
Journal Article - Landscape Conceptual Models
Journal Article - Landscape Values
September 1994
September 1994
A National Landscape
Assessment:
Relationship of Bird
Abundance and
Species Richness to
Landscape Patterns
Breeding bird species richness is an important component of overall
species richness in ecosystems across the United States. It is also a rel-
evant component of biological diversity and is an ecological resource
valued by the public. This project will involve characterization, by
EMAP 640 square-kilometer hexagons,.of breeding bird parameters
derived from the National Breeding Bird Survey (species presence and
abundance). Landscape metrics, including measures of dominance,
connectivity, and clustering (e.g., patch sizes) also will be compiled by
hexagon and then compared against breeding bird parameters. These
hexagons completely tile the lower 48 States and EMAP-Landscapes
anticipates characterizing each of these for breeding bird and
landscape parameters.
This project will benefit both EMAP-Landscapes and ORD's
Habitat/Biodiversity program. EMAP-Landscapes will gain a national
assessment of landscape pattern and will determine if landscape
indicators derived from the AVHRR satellite are related to breeding
bird species abundance and richness. This relationship is important
because EMAP-Landscapes is proposing to use AVHRR-derived
landscape indicators for yearly assessments of major landscape
change, and such changes should be relevant to ecological conditions
that that society values. The habitat/biodiversity program will gain an
increased understanding of the relationships between breeding birds
and landscape attributes, and variations in these relationships in
different landscape settings. If a strong relationship exists, it may be
possible to use AVHRR-derived landscape status and trends to address
relative risks to breeding birds.
Cooperating Institutions
U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL),
Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
ORNL staff will research landscape indicators for the project and will
produce national assessments of landscape indicators.
Oregon State University (OSU), Corvallis, Oregon.
OSU will research spatial statistics necessary to compare breeding bird
and landscape data.
U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS).
Scientists from the Service's National Breeding Bird Survey will be
assisting in the compilation of bird data on hexagons nationally.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (USDA-FS).
USDA-FS will use the landscape and breeding bird data to evaluate a
risk assessment protocol currently under development for assessing risk
to national biological diversity.
U.S. Department of Interior, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS),. EROS
Data Center, Sioux Falls, South Dakota.
The EROS Data Center will apply an AVHRR-based classification
scheme to derive characterizations of ecological resource types to be
used in landscape assessments.
34
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Available and Upcoming Products
University of Maine, Augusta, Maine.
A cooperator from the University of Maine will coordinate the overall
assessment. , , . . . . .
Manuscript—National Assessment of Landscapes July 1994
Using AVHRR imagery
Manuscript—National Assessment of Breeding ".•••-•.. July 1994
Birds
Manuscript—Relationship between AVHRR-
derived Landscape Patterns and Breeding Birds
November, 1994
35
-------
Resource Monitoring and Research
Surface Waters
Introduction
Available and Upcoming Products
2.7 Surface Waters
Inland surface waters consist of all of the Nation's lakes (other than the
Great Lakes), reservoirs, rivers and streams. The intent of the EMAP-
Surface Waters (EMAP-SW) program is to describe status and trends in
indicators of the condition of lakes (including reservoirs but excluding
the Great Lakes) and streams within the United States with respect to
• biological integrity - the sustainability of a balanced, integrative
adaptive community of organisms having a species composition,
diversity and functional organization comparable to that of the
natural habitat of the region;
• trophic condition - algal and macrophyte abundance comparable
to undisturbed systems of the region; and
• fishability - the presence of catchable game fish that are safe to eat.
Currently, EMAP-SW'stwo primary regional monitoring projects are in
the Northeast lakes and the Mid-Atlantic highland streams. In addition,
EMAP-SW conducts many smaller monitoring activities.
A second objective of EMAP-SW is to develop an updated and
nationally consistent estimate of surface water extent. This effort is
necessary because the number and distribution of lakes and streams
have been estimated from maps of varying ages and spatial variation.
Changes in surface water extent also have occurred with time.
The third objective of the EMAP-SW program is to identify associations
between indicators of environmental stresses and indicators of
environmental condition. EMAP-SW has begun to develop a diagnostic
strategy to aid in selecting useful indicators of environmental stress in
four general categories: hydrologic modifications, physical habitat
alterations, chemical stressors, and biological stressors (e.g., fisheries
management and harvesting, introduction of exotic species).
EMAP-SW Research Plan
March 1991
Surface Waters Pilot Report
February 1993
EMAP Contact
Steven C. Paulsen
U.S. EPA Environmental Research Laboratory
200 SW 35th Street
Corvallis, OR 97333
(503) 754-4428
Northeast Lakes
Demonstration
Through its fieldwork in 1991, EMAP-SW has been able to
evaluate trophic state and biological condition indicators on a
regional scale. EMAP-SW is currently using five condition
indicators of biological integrity that are being developed for lakes:
• macro!nvertebrate community index,
• fish index of biological integrity,
• zooplankton community index,
• index of diatom integrity, and
36
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Cooperating Institutions
• a riparian bird index.
EMAP-SW is also currently refining two indicators of lake-trophic
status: trophic condition index and percent of macrophytic cover.
In its third field season, EMAP-SW will work with the EPA Regions
and the FWS to implement additional indicators of biological
integrity. Approximately 80 lakes will be visited across the
geographic region to collect biological condition indicators based
on chlorophyll a, macrophytes, fish, riparian birds, zooplankton,
benthos, and sedimentary diatoms. Additional measures will be
taken to test the hypothesis that poor biological conditions are
associated with either hydrologic, physical habitat, chemical, or
biological modifications.
To address fishability values, EMAP-SW is analyzing whole fish
tissue for heavy metal and organic residue concentrations. These
analyses are being conducted as part of both the Northeast lake
demonstration and Mid-Atlantic stream pilot study.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS).
FWS will help to develop an interagency management committee to
plan the project's field implementation.
Sfafe University of New York, College of Environmental Sciences and
Forestry (SU NY-Syracuse).
SUNY has a cooperative agreement with the FWS to conduct the field
sampling.
Dartmouth College, Dartmouth, New Hampshire.
Dartmouth College will conduct analysis of zooplankton including
species enumeration and development of an index of biotic integrity
for zooplankton.
University of Maine, Augusta, Maine.
The University of Maine is conducting the chemical analyses of
regional water samples. They also are conducting studies to evaluate
and test riparian bird indicators.
Queens College, City University of New York, Flushing, New York.
Queens College is enumerating diatom species and developing an
index of biotic diversity using diatoms.
University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV).
UNLV is performing the fisheries analyses, including the
consideration of an index of biotic integrity for lake fish
assemblages.
Oregon State University (OSU) Corvallis, Oregon.
OSU has a cooperative agreement to assess physical habitat and
the regional chemical conditions for the population of Northeast
lakes.
EPA Regions.
EPA Regions I and II are responsible with the FWS for regional
planning, auditing field crews, and state liaison. Region II also is
conducting the Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems
(TIME) project to address the acid rain issue.
37
-------
Resource Monitoring and Research
Surface Waters
Available and Upcoming Products
States.
The states of Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire,
New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont are identifying
lake access points and reference lakes, and are reviewing field
protocols.
Field Operations Manual June 1993
Annual Statistical Summary for 1992 Data
October 1993
Annual Statistical Summary for 1993 Data
September 1994
Stream Condition in the
Mid-Atlantic Highlands
Cooperating Institutions
Available and Upcoming Products
Stream activities in the Mid-Atlantic Highlands are part of EPA Region
Ill's Mid-Atlantic Highland Assessment (MAHA) project. This
represents the first EMAP-SW regional-scale stream pilot. This project
will evaluate reference conditions and biological condition indicators,
including the macroinvertebrate condition index and fish index of
biological integrity, in streams in two ecoregions in the Mid-Atlantic
Highlands. The project also will monitor stream data collected as
probability samples to describe regional stream condition. Portions of
this project will provide a higher level of detail than the standard
EMAP sampling density. EMAP-SW will sample approximately 50
streams in the Mid-Atlantic Highlands of Region III for biological
condition indicators (fish, macrobenthos, and periphyton).
EPA Region III.
EPA Region III is responsible for the overall Mid-Atlantic Highland
study. In conjunction with the states, Region III is managing the
field monitoring not only for EMAP-SW but also for monitoring
180 other surface water sites in the same general area.
States.
The states of Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia have
identified reference sites for the calibration of EMAP-SW monitoring;
they have also provided staff from each of the states to work on the
field monitoring teams. These states will be key to developing a
comprehensive assessment of the results.
Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.
The Smithsonian Institution is performing the fish identification for the
Mid-Atlantic Highlands studies.
Oregon State University (OSU), Corvallis, Oregon.
OSU is determining the physical habitat attributes for each site and
estimating regional chemical condition.
University of Maine, Augusta, Maine.
The University of Maine is performing the chemical analyses for
samples collected in this study.
Draft Field Operations Manual
March 1993
Annual Statistical Summary
June 1994
Analysis of Existing
Data on Lake Fish
Few lake investigators have addressed the questions of status and
trends in fish assemblages or how these data may describe biological
integrity of lakes. These issues are key to the success of EMAP. An
exhaustive literature review, particularly on fish, must be done to
38
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Cooperating Institutions
determine the applicability of different biological assemblages for
assessing biotic integrity. EMAP-SW will identify and evaluate existing
data sets and literature for the ability to determine the variance
components needed to evaluate status and trends in EMAP and
indicators of lake condition based on fish assemblages.
University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV).
UNLV is conducting the literature search and analysis of existing
data bases on lake fish assemblages.
Wisconsin Lakes
Inter-Agency Pilot
Cooperating Institutions
The Intergovernmental Task Force on Water Quality Monitoring is
developing a comprehensive framework for coordinating the various
information needs for water quality monitoring, including the need for
national, regional, and local status and trends. EMAP-SW goals for this
pilot project are to evaluate method protocols, establish reference sites
and test biological indicators in Midwest lakes. The goals of this Task
Force overlap with the goals of EMAP-SW. Therefore, EMAP-SW will
participate in pilot activities that may affect national efforts to obtain
reliable data on status and trends. EMAP-SW will develop a pilot
activity to illustrate how the Inter-Governmental Task Force on Water
Quality Monitoring might coordinate interagency monitoring in the
United States.
U.S. Department of Interior, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).
An interagency agreement was initiated with USGS to conduct a
comparison of methods, a comparison of program objectives for
monitoring among EPA, the State of Wisconsin, USGS and the
FWS, and a comparison of reference site selection criteria. The
USGS also will coordinate sampling activities as part of the
Wisconsin Inter-Agency Pilot study.
U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS).
FWS will be assisting USGS with the comparative studies.
EPA's Office of Water and EPA Region V.
The Office of Water and Region V also will be assisting USGS in
these comparative studies.
The State of Wisconsin.
The State of Wisconsin is providing the facilities for the project
team, local knowledge of reference sites, historical perspective on
monitoring in Wisconsin and assisting with the comparative
studies.
39
-------
Resource Monitoring and Research
Wetlands
Introduction
2.8 Wetlands
In wetlands, water saturation or shallow covering by water is the
dominant factor determining the nature of soil development as well as
the types of plant and animal communities living in the soil and on its
surface. Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and aquatic
systems: common names ascribed to wetlands—marshes, swamps,
potholes, bogs, fens, and pocosins—attest to the variety of wetland
types. EMAP-Wetlands has aggregated 56 wetland types used by the
FWS National Wetlands Inventory into twelve classes. From these
twelve classes, the current program is focusing on three wetland
classes which constitute 80% of the vegetated wetlands in the United
States:
• Estuarine Emergent - These salt marshes are the dominant type of
wetlands in coastal areas and are critical in providing integral
functions associated with the overall condition of estuaries and
marine resources.
• Palustrine Emergent - These areas are a major wetland class in the
Midwest and are crucial to the production of waterfowl for much
of the Nation.
• Palustrine Forested - These areas occur predominately in the
Southeastern part of the United States and provide many of the
values ascribed to wetlands, e.g. flood attenuation and timber
production.
While wetlands provide people with many values and functions,
EMAP-Wetlands has chosen four social values to examine initially:
• Biological Integrity—The sustainabilty of a balanced, integrated,
- adaptive community of organisms having a species composition,
diversity, habitat, and functional organization comparable to that
of natural wetlands in the region.
• Productivity —The quantity or quality of any service or product
that wetlands provide to society (e.g. timber production, wildlife,
or recreation).
• Flood Attenuation —The ability of wetlands to temporarily store
water and dampen peak flows.
• Water Quality Improvement—The ability of wetlands to assimilate
nutrients, trap sediments, or otherwise reduce downstream
pollutant loads.
EMAP Contact
Estuarine Emergent
(Salt Marsh)
Pilot Phases I and II
Spencer A. Peterson
U.S. EPA Environmental Research Laboratory
200 SW 35th Street
Corvallis, OR 97330
(503) 754-4457
Estuarine emergent wetlands comprise only about five percent of the
total wetland resources of the Nation but are among the most
productive fish and shellfish nursery grounds in the country and are
thus the most studied. EMAP-Wetlands initiated a 1991 pilot study in
Louisiana because this is where a large portion of the estuarine
emergent resource resides and where much previous research had
40
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
been conducted. The primary objectives for this Phase I pilot study
were to
• test the ability of a proposed suite of ecological indicators to detect
differences between degraded and (relatively) non-degraded salt
marshes; . . '
• evaluate the spatial variability of indicators among hydrologic
basins, within degraded and non-degraded salt marshes, as well as
within sample sites;
• evaluate different measurement protocols to develop standard
techniques; and
• identify logistical issues important for future field sampling
programs in the Gulf Coast salt marshes.
Results of the Phase I Pilot Study were incorporated into an indicator
evaluation report. This report provides statistical summaries of
variability components within individual sites, among sites, and within
individual basins. Also, the Phase I Report provides recommendations
for wetlands indicators. Specifically, the report highlights three classes
of indicators: :
• those that would be most useful in regional demonstrations,
• those which require further evaluation/and
• those which are insufficiently robust to provide reliable indications
of wetland condition.
For Phase II, EMAP-Wetlands will
• test indicators recommended in Phase I;
• conduct additipnal indicator research at selected sites along the
Gulf Coast;
• evaluate additional biotic indicators, including macroinvertebrate
diversity and abundance, and indicators that reflect cumulative
effects overtime, such as sediment depth;
• select and collect information from approximately 50 probability-
based sites along the entire Gulf Coast (Florida, Alabama,
Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas); and
• evaluate relationships between remotely-sensed and ground-
truthed information at approximately 20 sites in the eastern Gulf of
Mexico.
Cooperating Institutions
U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, National
Wetlands Inventory (NWI).
The NWI is conducting research in the eastern Gulf of Mexico (AL, FL,
and MS) to determine the relationships between remote sensing and
selected ground measurements of wetland condition.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
NOAA is analyzing existing Thematic Mapper™ databases in relation
to ground measurements of wetlands in Louisiana and Texas.
41
-------
Resource Monitoring and Research
Wetlands
Available and Upcoming Products
University of Florida, Tallahassee.
The University of Florida will be collaborating with the NWI to make
ground measures at locations where the NWI has remote sensing
information.
Louisiana State University (LSU), Shreveport.
LSU has participated in the evaluation of indicators of wetland
condition in Louisiana. The University will be conducting additional
indicator evaluation research in coastal areas of both Louisiana and
Texas.
Utah State University Salt Lake City.
Utah State is evaluating the utility of using relatively inexpensive
videographic imagery to assess wetland condition.
Final Phase I Report
December 1993
Gulf-wide Data Report, Phase II
Video Imagery Analysis
April 1994
May 1994
Palustrine Emergent
(Prairie Potholes)
Pilot Study
This pilot study focuses on developing and testing indicator
performance and begins to address some of the variability questions
associated with wetlands indicators for palustrine emergent wetlands.
The research will provide an evaluation of indicators, candidate
reference sites, and index variability. These will provide the basis for
an EMAP-Wetlands Regional Demonstration Research Plan.
The specific FY93 activities include:
• testing remotely-sensed and ground-level indicators for their ability
to discriminate between wetlands in highly disturbed agricultural
landscapes and those in least disturbed (grassland) landscapes
across the Prairie Pothole Region,
• evaluating sample plot, index period, and annual variability of
indicators,
• evaluating different measurement protocols to develop standard
techniques, and
• identifying logistical issues important for future field sampling
programs in the prarie pothole region.
42
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Cooperating Institutions
U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS).
FWS is conducting research on the response of selected biotic
indicators to highly disturbed and relatively undisturbed agricultural
areas. They are relating condition of the wetlands to surrounding
landscape characteristics. In addition, the NWI is in the process of
digitizing its entire Prairie Potholes database for use by EMAP-
Wetlands for sample site selection and characterization.
North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota.
North Dakota State is cooperating with FWS to assess abiotic
indicators of soil condition in disturbed and undisturbed areas.
Available and Upcoming Products
Interim Report
May 1996
Final Report on Demonstration
June 1997
43
-------
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Section 3.0 integration and Assessment
introduction
Contents for Section 3
3.1 Assessment and Reporting 46
EMAP Advisory Panel and Workshops 47
Determination of Social and Societal Values 47
Development of EMAP Reporting Guidelines 47
Regional Ecosystem Assessment Prototype 48
Symposium on Ecosystem Health 48
3.2 Design and Statistics 50
Design Coordination 51
Status Estimation Research 51
R-EMAP Design Support 52
Global Grid Development. 53
Environmental Monitoring and
Statistics Research 54
3.3 Indicator Development 56
Summary and Revision of EMAP's Indicator
Development Strategy. 56
Review: Conceptual Models for Indicator
Development and Resource Assessment 57
Development of Cross-Cutting Assessment
Questions and Indicators 57
3.4 Information Management 58
User Interaction and Planning 59
Information Management Architecture 60
Systems Engineering 61
Systems Support and Operations 61
Geographic Information Systems Interface 61
Interagency Data Interchange 62
Advanced Technology Evaluation 62
Computer Science Direction 62
3.5 Landscape Characterization 64
Geographic Reference Database 65
Land-Cover Classification System Development...66
Land Cover Generation 66
Sampling Frame Development 67
Extent Estimation 68
Chesapeake Bay Watershed Pilot 68
Resource Group Pilot Support 69
R-EMAP Technical Assistance 69
3.6 Quality Assurance 70
Development of EMAP Data Quality Objectives 70
The EMAP-Quality Assurance Plan, and the EMAP
Management Systems Review 70
Quality Assurance Support. 70
3.7 Methods 71
EMAP-Methods 71
Methods Data Base 71
Methods Validation Protocols 71
Establish Taxonomic Coding System for EMAP....72
3.8 Logistics 73
Geographic Positioning Systems (GPS) 73
The eight integration and assessment groups conduct research on
issues such as combining information from different statistical
designs, providing guidance on indicator development, formulating
models to link condition indicators with social values, and designing
procedures for classifying nominal-subnominal scores for resource
condition.
Several of the integration and assessment groups are based at the
EMAP Research and Assessment Center at Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina, in order to promote the constant communication
and cross-group discussion which are essential to the development
of integrated assessment products.
These groups also work closely with the resource groups to ensure
there are common and compatible indicators, information manage-
ment systems, designs, landscape classification systems, and
assessment and reporting procedures. Appendix B shows the
FY93 to FY97 schedule for conducting research for, and providing
guidance to, the resource groups.
45
-------
Integration and Assessment
Assessment and Reporting
Introduction
Available and Upcoming Products
3.1 Assessment and Reporting
The EMAP-Assessment and Reporting (EMAP-A&R) group provides
guidance to ensure that data collected and analyzed by EMAP are
interpreted and presented in formats that can be understood by
clients in a consistent way and that are relevant to policy concerns.
Guidance is delivered to the resource groups both for assessments
of individual ecological resources and for the reporting
requirements of multiple resource assessments.
In FY91, the draft EMAP Program Guide was prepared and
reviewed by EPA's Science Advisory Board, with special attention
to the assessment and reporting aspects of the program's overall
agenda. As a result of SAB comments and reviews, EMAP-A&R has
prepared several additional documents, including a revised EMAP
Program Guide, an Assessment Framework, and a Regional Acidic
Deposition Assessment Case Study for the EPA Risk Assessment
Forum.
In late FY92 and early FY93, EMAP-A&R, in conjunction with EMAP-
Indicators, conducted a series of workshops with each of the
EMAP resource groups to focus on three fundamental issues:
• identification of important social values for each ecological
resource and for EMAP as a whole (e.g., for use in multiple
resource assessments and in the selection of cross-
resource indicators),
• formulation of assessment questions related to these
values, and
• development and evaluation of indicators of ecological
condition to address the assessment questions.
Further development of this project is discussed below.
EMAP Assessment Framework July 1993
EMAP Master Glossary
August 1993
Parallel Analysis of Assessment Paradigms in August 1993
Various Disciplines and Programs:
Lessons Available to EMAP
EMAP and Policy Analysis:
Giving Assessment Primacy
August 1993
EMAP Program Guide
September 1993
State of the Science in Assessment
September 1993
Role of Nominal/Subnominal in EMAP
September 1993
Regional Acidic Deposition Case Study
October 1993
EMAP Contact
D. Eric Hyatt
U.S. EPA (MD 75)
EMAP Research and Assessment Center
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Telephone: 919/541-0673
46
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
EMAP Advisory Panel
and Workshops
EMAP-A&R will invite nine nationally-recognized panelists with
expertise in ecological indicators, assessment science, and resource
economics to attend a workshop to be held in 1993. This
workshop will help EMAP-A&R respond to EPA's Science Advisory
Board's (SAB's) June, 1993, review of EMAP-A&R's activities.
This post-SAB review workshop will help plan any actions or
necessary modifications resulting from the SAB's comments. The
panel will review the individual products of EMAP-A&R, the
proposed programmatic focus and direction, and the existing and
planned EMAP-A&R research activities as well as their potential
impact on the scientific and regulatory communities. The panel will
provide both oral and written summary comments regarding the
results of these 'meetings.
Determination of
Social and Societal
Values
Public and private decision-makers want and need better
information about the values of ecosystems in weighing the
advantages and disadvantages of human actions that may impact
ecological resources^ A frequent problem is the lack of information
about
• physical, chemical, and biological changes to ecosystems;
• the social or economic consequences that might result from
alternative management approaches and interventions; and
• the "value" or benefits of those actions.
This project will link social values to ecological indicators and
regional-scale assessments that are the basis of EMAP's approach.
The project will address two basic needs:
• An assessment of the use of new or existing methods to
determine the social values of ecosystems and
• Directions on how to apply the most promising methods to
determine social values for one or more case studies.
The project plans to incorporate monitoring data from EMAP-
Surface Waters and EMAP-FHM, in either the Northeast or
Southeast United States. This will enable the definition of case
studies which will demonstrate assessments for each resource
group and at site-specific and regional scales.
The products of this project will provide preliminary conclusions to
validate social values for an EMAP assessment as well as confirm
the methods that were used to determine them.
Development of EMAP
Reporting Guidelines
This project will develop and produce reporting guidelines for use
by all components of EMAP. Reporting guidelines outline the
specific formats, procedures, consistency and standardization
criteria, visualization techniques, and other requirements that all
formal EMAP reports must meet. EMAP-A&R will also prepare
similar standards for ad hoc EMAP products. This document will be
preceded by the development of a formal Strategic Plan and a
Research Plan for EMAP-A&R.
47
-------
Integration and Assessment
Assessment and Reporting
Available or Anticipated Products Assessment and Reporting Strategic Plan
Assessment and Reporting Research Plan
EMAP Reporting Guidelines Version 1.0
March 1994
June 1994
September 1994
Regional Ecosystem
Assessment Prototype
Available and Upcoming Products
This project will produce a regional ecosystem assessment
prototype (REAP) that will combine EMAP data from multiple
resource groups and auxiliary datasets. It will involve the
development and refining of a visual assessment matrix and
accompanying descriptive text, which can serve as a model for
future EMAP assessments.
The project will begin with a review of existing research literature
and interviews with scientists directing research efforts currently
underway within academic and governmental sectors, in order to
enable REAP to take advantage of state-of-the-science knowledge
about ecosystem characteristics, especially the factors which
differentiate nominal or sub-nominal (stressed) ecosystems.
The project will select a region with at least two biogeographic
provinces. REAP will develop a scenario that assesses, for
demonstration purposes, resource categories, specific values,
stressors, and indicators of ecological condition. Any readily
available data will be acquired on the extent and distribution of
selected ecological resources in the region, and on four to eight
stressors that would potentially affect the selected condition
indicators. Finally, CIS and other visualization tools and techniques
will be used to display the extent and distribution of the resources,
to overlay the condition of the resource for each biogeographic
province, and to superimpose possible stresses.
Survey of Assessment Literature and Projects
REAP Version 1.0
September 1993
September 1993
Symposium on
Ecosystem Health
EMAP-A&R is contributing to the planning and sponsorship of the
First International Symposium On Ecosystem Health And Human
Medicine, to be held at the University of Guelph in Ottawa,
Canada, in June, 1994. Ecosystem health and human medicine are
increasingly seen as necessary approaches to environmental
management. This emerging, transdisciplinary field bridges the
social, health, and ecosystem sciences in fostering new systematic
methodologies for the diagnosis, prognosis and treatment of
ecosystems under stress.
This project will provide an opportunity for professionals working
in ecosystem science and management, medical and health
sciences, environmental ethics and law, and ecological economics
to take part in the development of integrated approaches to
evaluating, monitoring and rehabilitating ecosystems at landscape
levels. Themes of the symposium will include:
• approaches to assessing ecosystem health,
• the interface of human health and ecosystem health , and
• environmental management and policy.
48
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Cooperating Institutions
Environment Canada, Forestry Canada, The Royal Society of
Canada, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency are co-
sponsors of the Symposium.
Other groups cooperating in the conference include:
The Desert Research Institute, University of Nevada, Reno,
Nevada.
The International Society for Ecological Economics,
Solomons Island, Maryland.
The International Society for Aquatic Ecosystem Health.
The International Society of Ecosystem Health and Medicine.
The Laboratory of Ecotoxicology, London, England.
The National Institute of Public Health and Environmental
Protection, London, England.
The University of Guelph, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
49
-------
Integration and Assessment
Design and Statistics
Introduction
EMAP Contact
3.2 Design and Statistics
EMAP is based on a survey sampling design and analysis strategy.
EMAP-Design and Statistics (EMAP-D&S) develops and coordinates
the implementation of the statistical framework for this sampling
design and its associated analysis strategy. Now that the
conceptual framework for the sampling design has been
established, research is needed to ensure that the framework
addresses the attributes of the ecological resources as it is applied.
As each EMAP resource group specifies its sampling design, EMAP-
D&S will coordinate implementation across groups to ensure
consistency with the conceptual framework. EMAP-D&S also
conducts research on environmental statistics to address statistical
issues presented by a long-term ecological monitoring program
sampling over time and space.
EMAP's sampling design considers all ecological resources on a na-
tional basis, with regional levels of resolution. This monitoring ap-
proach will produce estimates with known statistical confidence, not
only for a specific point in time but also annually over time.
EMAP-D&S is producing customized sampling designs that address
specific issues presented by the attributes of each EMAP resource
group. Statistical estimation procedures are being documented, or
developed when necessary, for each application. A key part of the
design process is the specification of procedures for conducting
statistical power and precision analyses required by EMAP data
quality objectives. EMAP-D&S also coordinates with regional, state,
and international groups with an interest in EMAP's design.
An integral part of EMAP-D&S's activities is statistical research to
address issues identified during development and implementation of
sampling design, analysis, and procedures. The initial design-based,
status estimation and trend detection procedures will be evaluated
to determine how well they perform when applied to resource
group sampling-design problems. Through the development of
improved procedures, the precision of status estimates and trend
detection power can be strengthened. Other issues that EMAP-D&S
will address are
• removal of the impact of measurement error on cumulative
function status estimates,
• statistical graphics presentation of EMAP estimates,
• evaluation of global grid models for sampling designs,
• multi-stage statistical procedures for extent estimation, and
• trend estimation procedures for regional populations.
Anthony R. Olsen
U.S. EPA Environmental Research Laboratory
200 SW 35th Street
Corvallis, OR 97333
(503) 754-4790
50
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Available and Upcoming Products
Design Report for EMAP by S. Overton, D.
White and D. Stevens, EPA/600/3-91/053
May 1990
The Ecological Geography of EMAP by D. November 1990
Norton and T. Slonecker. Ceo Info Systems
"Cartographic and Geometric Components of January 1992
a Global Sampling Design for Environmental
Monitoring," Cartography and Geographic
Information Systems, Vol. 19, No. 1, 1992,
pp. 5-22 by White, Kimerling and Overton
EMAP Design Video
Journal Article on EMAP Sampling Design
Annual Statistical Summary Statistical Graphics
Guidance
Trend Power Analysis: Procedures and
Algorithms Guidance ___
Extent Estimation Statistical Framework
Existing Data Procedures for Discrete
Population Estimation
July 1993
April 1993
Status Estimation: Procedures and Algorithms August 1993
Guidance
September 1993
September 1993
October 1993
February 1994
Design Coordination
Status Estimation
Research
Coordination of the sampling design activities across EMAP is
critical to achieve an integrated program. This task provides
technical statistics consultation as requested by EMAP resource
groups to assist their implementation of sampling design and
analysis procedures.
Status estimation procedures must be developed concurrently with
the development of sampling designs. Although some status
estimation procedures currently exist as general models, others are
needed to address the estimation issues arising from modified
sampling designs being proposed by EMAP resource groups. These
designs are required, in some cases, to incorporate the unique
features of specific ecological resources. The objective of this task is
to conduct statistical research required for annual statistical
summaries.
The design-based status estimation procedures currently being
documented and used do not incorporate all the information
available; therefore current procedures result in unnecessarily high
variance estimates. Additional research on the procedures being
applied will lead to improved variance estimates and hence will
result in narrower confidence intervals with better coverage.
Currently, status variance estimates do not include an adjustment
for measurement error. Completion of this project will enable bias in
the percentiie estimates to be reduced.
The near-term requirements for this project are directed at research
critical for use in annual statistical summaries. One area that the
research will concentrate on is design-based and model-assisted
status estimation procedures for cumulative distribution functions
(CDFs). Another area of research will center on the procedures for
the deconvolution of indicator measurement error from the
51
-------
Integration and Assessment
Design and Statistics
Contributing Institutions
Available and Upcoming Products
estimated cumulative distribution function to arrive at the estimated
ecological resource population cumulative function.
•Oregon State University (OSU), Department of Statistics, Corvallis,
Oregon.
OSU has provided continuing support for EMAP-D&S activities,
with special focus on status estimation issues.
Comparing Sampling Designs for Monitoring
Ecological Status and Trends: Impact of
Temporal Patterns
Statistical Properties of Designs for Sampling
Continuous Functions in Two Dimensions
Using a Triangular Grid
An Extension of the Horvitz-Thompson
Theorem to Point Sampling from a
Continuous Universe
Efficiency of Least Sauares Estimators in the
Presence of Spatial Autocorrelation
Using "Found" Data to Augment a Probability
Sample: Procedure and Case Study
Comparison of Variance Estimators of the
Horvitz-Thompson Estimator for
Randomized Variable Probability Sampling
Probability Sampling and Population Inference
in Monitoring Programs
Explanatory Models for Ecological Response
Surfaces
January 1993
February 1993
March 1993
April 1993
May 1993
June 1993
July 1993
November 1994
R-EMAP Design
Support
This project provides technical support to EPA Regions in the
development of their R-EMAP sampling designs, and consults on
their application of statistical analysis procedures to ensure their
studies are consistent with EMAP-D&S guidance. It is critical that
R-EMAP studies are conducted with sampling designs that are
consistent with that of EMAP, since the Regions will combine EMAP
resource group information and R-EMAP information in their
assessments.
52
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Global Grid
Development
Figure 13. Hexagon Grid imposed on
North America (from Design Report for
EMAP, 1990)
There is a need to establish global baseline data on reference
ecological conditions against which future conditions can be
compared and changes documented with statistical confidence. This
need has grown in importance with the increasing complexity,
scope, and social importance of environmental issues. As a
consequence, monitoring programs must provide quantitative,
scientific assessments of the complex effects of stresses on
ecosystems. Currently a number of existing national programs and
countries monitor environmental conditions on a large scale;
however, all of these monitoring programs have different sampling
design philosophies.
The EMAP sampling grid is based on a geometric model of the earth,
and it addresses the primary requirements for a probability-based
sampling design based on a systematic grid. The approach has
limitations, however, in
• the selection of the map projection,
• the model's arbitrary orientation on the globe, and
• the choice of base grid density.
Several similar approaches have been identified in the literature that
appear to address these limitations and that may result in wider
acceptance of a common geometric model.
EMAP-D&S has been working to develop a geometric model of the
earth that is suitable for use in applications of probability-based
sampling designs of ecological resources as well as in the analysis
and management of geographic data from a global perspective.
EMAP-D&S will also document the issues relevant to the selection
of a geometric model, and will identify known potential alternatives.
Another project consists of conducting research on revised EMAP
models to illustrate the advantages of considering alternatives.
EMAP-D&S will hold a workshop for international experts to
discuss the merits of several evolving alternative geometric models
including EMAP's current model, a revised EMAP model, and a
model developed by NASA researchers. This workshop will
evaluate the utility of alternative global monitoring designs as well as
the ability of these designs to evaluate the condition of major
ecosystems on a global scale. The results of this workshop will
allow EPA to determine if EMAP's current design should be modified
to satisfy the requirements of global-scale monitoring programs.
Each of the designs to be debated at the workshop will be evaluated
on its ability to
• to estimate the spatial extent of various habitat types
throughout the world;
• to estimate the condition, and changes in conditions, on a
regional scale, of biomes throughout the world; and
• to provide a framework to organize and manage existing
monitoring data.
53
-------
Integration and Assessment
Design and Statistics
Contributing Institutions
Oregon State University (OSU), Department of Statistics, Corvallis,
Oregon.
The university has provided ongoing support for EMAP-D&S
activities, and is providing considerable support to the technical
problems of selecting an improved geometric model, and logistics
support for the international workshop.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Nairobi, Kenya.
UNEP is providing international sponsorship and support for the
conference.
Available and Upcoming Products
Working Paper on Global Grid Issues
Fall 1993
Development of a Global Grid Model for
Environmental Surveys
1994
Environmental
Monitoring and
Statistics Research
Contributing Institutions
Concerns expressed about the EMAP sampling design frequently
arise because research has been inadequately performed and
communicated in natural resource statistics. General statistical
research may provide the foundation for statistical techniques
required in natural resource monitoring programs but will not be
directly applicable or be published in the natural resource literature.
It is only by initiating an effort similar to the biostatistical research of
the National Institutes of Health that the specialized statistical needs
of the ecological community will be met.
To help meet the statistical needs of ecological monitoring and
assessment programs, EMAP will conduct and support
collaborative research in emerging areas of statistics that have
immediate application to ecological programs. This project will
address specific research needs of EMAP and other national
environmental monitoring programs, such as: the impact of
measurement errors on natural resource surveys; resource extent
estimation, especially as related to multi-stage estimation using
remote sensing and ground survey information; and model-based
estimation of cumulative functions in complex surveys.
Several universities are actively cooperating in the development of a
more aggressive research agenda for the natural resource sciences.
Among the leaders, but not the only groups in this endeavor, are
Penn State University (State College, PA), the University of Texas
(Austin, TX), Oregon State University (Corvallis, OR), the
University of Washington (Seattle), and the State University of New
York, College of Environmental Sciences and Forestry (Syracuse,
NY).
54
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Available and Upcoming Products
Variance Estimation in the EMAP Strategy for January 1994
Sampling Discrete Ecological Resources
Properties of Design-Based Estimators of
Distribution Functions
An Application of Geostatistical Tools to
Design-Based Variance Estimation
February 1994
March 1994
A Framework for Evaluating the Sensitivity of April 1994
the EMAP Design
Pairwise Inclusion Probability Approximations August 1994
in Random-Order, Variable Probability
Systematic Sampling
Density Estimation Procedures in Spatial
Modeling of Ecological Resources
September 1994
A Temporal Dynamic Model for Compositional
Monitoring Data
Potential of Adaptive Sampling for Status
Estimation
September 1994
September 1994
55
-------
Integration and Assessment
Indicator Development
Introduction
EMAP Contact
3.3 Indicator Development
Indicator selection and development is critical to the EMAP goal of
monitoring and assessing the condition of the Nation's ecological
resources and contributing to decisions on environmental
protection and management. EMAP's Indicator Development
program is designed to
• prepare and implement a strategy for indicator development
and evaluation;
• develop procedures for ensuring the consistency, compatibility
and comparability of indicators among EMAP resource groups;
and
• conduct research on ecological indicator concepts and
methodology to support the program.
The goals of EMAP-lndicator Development (EMAP-lndicators) are to
provide suites of indicators with which to measure the status of,
and trends and changes in, the condition of ecological resources
and to provide diagnostic procedures to associate selected
anthropogenic and natural stressors with condition indicators.
M. Craig Barber
U.S. EPA Environmental Research Laboratory
College Stations Road
Athens, GA 30613
Telephone: 706/546-3147
Summary and Revision
of EMAP's Indicator
Development Strategy
Available and Upcoming Products
EMAP drafted its first Indicator Development Strategy in 1991.
This strategy was revised the following year in an attempt to
resolve some conceptual and terminology issues. Since the
revision, EMAP has refined its programmatic objectives and has
striven to clarify and simplify its conceptual framework. In the
fall of 1992, workshops on indicators were held to incorporate
these developments into the strategy. A summary of the
workshop will be completed to give Indicator and Assessment
and Reporting Technical Coordinators as well as the resource
group Technical Directors a tool with which to explain the
indicator strategy to various EPA program offices and other
important client groups in the conning year. The summary and
the revised strategy should help the Coordinators and
Directors to determine if the values and assessment questions
currently identified by EMAP are indeed the important issues
facing decision-makers.
Ecological Indicators, Vol. 1&2. 7992. June 1992
McKenzie, DH, DE Hyatt, and VJ McDonald,
eds. Elsevier (Chapman Hall), New York.
Summary of indicator workshops
September. 1993
Revised Indicator Development Strategy
September 1993
56
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Review: Conceptual
Models for Indicator
Development and
Resource Assessment
Available and Upcoming Products
Conceptual models play a central role in EMAP's indicator
development strategy. These models identify
• the biotic and abiotic structural components of a resource;
• the interactions among a resource's structural components;
• external forcing functions that maintain the resource; and
• the endogenous and exogenous factors, including stressors of
concern, that affect the resource's structure and function.
This project will review available literature on conceptual and
mathematical models that could be used by EMAP resource groups
as conceptual models of their resources. The project will also
provide technical assistance and coordination for modeling efforts.
This activity will help ensure that models developed by one
resource group are logically consistent with those of other resource
groups.
Review and Guidance on Development of
Conceptual Models
March 1994
Development of
Cross-Cutting
Assessment Questions
and Indicators
Available and Upcoming Products
During a series of meetings between an EMAP-lndicators review
team and each resource group, it was determined that there are
many questions .and issues that need to be addressed from a
cross-resource perspective. Through this project, a workgroup
consisting of EMAP-lndicators and EMAP-Assessment and
Reporting will schedule four cross-resource workshops for FY93
and early FY94. These workshops will initiate the identification of
social values and the formulation of assessment questions that
must be addressed from a multiple-resource and landscape
perspective.
Summary of cross-cutting social values,
assessment questions and indicators for
aquatic EMAP resource groups
April 1994
Summary of cross-cutting social values,
assessment questions and indicators for
terrestrial EMAP resource groups
July 1994
57
-------
Integration and Assessment
Information Management
Introduction
3.4 Information Management
Information Management (IM) within EMAP is the vehicle with which
the total EMAP program manages information from field collection
through publication of results. As such, EMAP information man-
agement requires comprehensive integrated scientific information
systems that facilitate communication of environmental data from
diverse sources spatially (over distance) and temporally (over time)
in a form that users can easily access. Allowing analysis of EMAP
data across heterogeneous networks of personal and scientific
computers, the technical goal of EMAP-lnformation Management
(EMAP-IM) is an environmental open system. This open system is
not one large computer system but a distributed system composed
of resource group systems, a Central EMAP system, and other
appropriate systems within EPA and other federal agencies such as
NASA, NOAA, and USDA-FS. This distributed open system
supports the delivery of EMAP information products, consisting of
the Annual Statistical •Summaries, Environmental Assessment
Reports, and databases of processed information provided by the
resource groups. To accomplish this, each resource group
supports a networked database node containing its own monitoring
data and associated assessment products.
The EMAP Central node contains information of interest to all
resource groups, such as taxonomic classifications, and national
summaries and assessments. These EMAP information management
systems must operate compatibly within the EPA Information
Resources Management (IRM) infrastructure and follow federal IRM
standards. EMAP-IM activities are guided by these requirements:
• They must facilitate access by major program participants to
monitoring and assessment data of known integrity, quality
and pedigree;
• They must support nationwide data collection activities; and
• They must provide flexible data access, capable of meeting
the needs of different users and technologies.
To develop this open system EMAP-IM has adopted an evolution-
ary approach consisting of three major integrated processes. These
processes are: (1) Proof-of-Concept, (2) Technology Transfer, (3)
Enterprise. In FY93, EMAP-IM has focused on the development and
implementation of the proof-of-concept (POC). The purpose of the
POC is to verify all concepts used in the development of EMAP
information management systems by developing functioning
prototypes. When these concepts are proven, they are released as
new versions of EMAP Central and resource group systems. Based
on requirements defined by the Estuaries and Forest Health
Monitoring resource groups, a first version of EMAP information
management systems was demonstrated in May, 1993.
The development of EMAP's information management systems
involves the following major functional teams:
• User Interaction and Planning—facilitates defining user re-
quirements and provides user support, training, documentation
and consultation on the effective use and continued develop-
ment of the EMAP information management system;
58
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
EMAP Contact:
• IM Architecture—provides the design, data, module interface,
system administration, and security standards, quality
assurance standards and procedures, implementation strategies
and strategic plans;
• Systems Engineering—based on user specifications developed
by User Interaction and Planning, provides for system
development from proof-of-concept versions through operating
systems;
• Systems Support and Operations—maintains hardware and
system configuration for the Central node, assists ORD
laboratories in their operational support of EMAP resource
group nodes, acquires new hardware and software, and
operates information management systems;
• CIS Interface— provides spatial and geographical analytical
tools for EMAP information management systems;
• Interagency Data Interchange—provides an active, aggressive
approach to establishing information exchange standards and
methods with other agencies for the purposes of integrating re-
lated information; .
• Advanced Technology Evaluation—provides interfaces to the
ecological science and information science communities to iden-
tify new information technologies for incorporation into
EMAP;and
• Computer Science Direction—provides primary scientific
direction for development efforts and provides technical peer
reviews from a scientific and engineering standpoint.
EMAP's development method ensures a successful system through
the use of an iterative design approach. This approach specifically
seeks users requirements to drive development and entails a con-
tinuous cycle of analyzing, prototyping, developing, delivering, as-
sessing user feedback, and evolving.
Robert F. Shepanek
U.S. EPA (RD 680)
401 M Street SW
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 260-3255
User Interaction and
Planning
The primary focus of the user interaction and planning team is to
determine user requirements and plan their integration into the
system development process. For the proof-of-concept, Joint Appli-
cation Development (JAD) sessions identified the requirements of
EMAP-Forest Health Monitoring,. EMAP-Estuaries, and Central EMAP
users. For Technology Transfer, the User Interaction and Planning
team has published a plan to identify user requirements for all
EMAP resource and coordinating groups. The team develops user
materials, (e.g. training curricula and documentation) and will be
responsible for planning and coordinating the transfer and
implementation of newly developed IM products to EMAP's
coordinating and resource groups.
59
-------
Integration and Assessment
Information Management
Available and Upcoming Products
Proof-Of-Concept Design Specifications v 1.0 September 1993
Proof-Of-Concept User—Documentation October 1993
Proof-Of-Concept Training Program October 1993
Proof-Of-Concept User Test Specifications
Technology Transfer Plan
Enterprise Modeling Plan
October 1993
August 1993
December 1993
Information
Management
Architecture
Available and Upcoming Products
This team is tasked with the identification, development and pro-
mulgation of standards for EMAP's information management sys-
tems. This work will establish an EMAP-IM infrastructure of stan-
dards, policies, procedures and technology that encompasses and
supports all aspects of systems development, implementation and
integration. This project provides support in the specific areas of:
• data architecture standards;
• process architecture standards;
• technology architecture standards;
• network standards;
• system development life cycle standards;
• security standards and procedures;
• quality assurance standards and procedures;
• configuration management standards and procedures; and
• data administration activities.
It is important to note that the standards that are produced are not
static. As new technologies or new user requirements are identified
for incorporation into EMAP systems, the appropriate standards
are updated to guide new EMAP information management develop-
ment efforts. In addition to standards support, the architecture
function supplies data administration support for EMAP-IM. Data,
process, and technology models of all EMAP information manage-
ment systems are managed in such a way that they are accessible
to all components of EMAP-IM to serve as building blocks or tem-
plates for new EMAP information management systems.
Proof-of-Concept Standards Manuals
August 1993
Proof-of-Concept Operations Procedures
May 1993
Proof-Of-Concept Security Policy
May 1993
Proof-Of-Concept Standard Quality Assurance May 1993
Models
Quality Assurance Guidelines for System
Architecture
May 1993
Repository Configuration Management
Procedures
September 1993
60
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Systems Engineering
Available and Upcoming Products
The systems engineering team is responsible for implementing the
requirements specifications developed by user interaction and
planning for EMAP information management systems design and
implementation. EMAP-IM system engineering functions will include
coding, integrating, and testing each version of the EMAP Central
System and all centrally developed software tools. For the proof-of-
concept, the systems engineering team has designed and populated
distributed Oracle databases for EMAP Central, EMAP-Forest Health
Monitoring, and EMAP-Estuaries nodes, and developed Oracle and
SAS interfaces to these databases. All EMAP information
management systems are developed in accordance with standards
developed and promulgated by the IM architecture team.
POC Distributed Database Design Specifications September 1993
Proof-of-Concept Distributed Databases
October 1993
Proof-of-Concept Version 1
December 1993
Systems Support and
Operations
Available and Upcoming Products
The systems support and operations team is responsible for imple-
menting operational standards set by the EMAP-IM architecture
team and the operations of the EMAP Central system and net-
worked database node. This operational support includes but is not
limited to:
« configuration management,
« testing,
« quality assurance,
• maintenance of an information (data) inventory,
« system administration and security,
« operations staffing and facilities, and
• hardware and software procurements.
The systems support team uses its experience to assist the ORD
laboratories in their operations of EMAP resource group systems
and networked database nodes. This team will coordinate with
Agency groups offering centralized services such as the National
Data Processing Division (NDPD) and the Office of Information
Resources Management. As an example, this team recently worked
with NDPD's Telecommunications Branch to establish TCP/IP
network connections to support the Proof-of-Concept.
POC Configuration Management System
December 1993
POC Change Control System
December 1993
Geographic Information
Systems Interface
An integral part of the information management architecture is the
Geographic Information Systems (CIS) Interface. Currently under
development, this is an electronic link between the EMAP informa-
tion management system that handles field monitoring data and the
Geographic Reference Database that handles spatial data for the
program. The purpose of this team is to support the ongoing de-
velopment of that interface and its integration with ongoing informa-
tion management efforts.
61
-------
Integration and Assessment
Information Management
Available and Upcoming Products cis Components for POC Prototype
October 1993
Interagency Data
Interchange
Available and Upcoming Products
Data from other agencies, inter-governmental groups, EPA Regions
and states may be required to produce EMAP assessments. In turn,
these agencies may need access to EMAP data for their own report-
ing processes. The Interagency Data Interchange (IDI) team repre-
sents EMAP-IM to related programs with the specific charter of de-
signing and/or adopting data interchange standards. The IDI team is
also responsible for designing EMAP's Directory Catalog structure.
To accomplish this, the IDI team is examining the applicability of the
various data directory and catalog solutions currently being pro-
posed by other agencies such as NASA's Master Directory and
those identified by the Consortium for International Earth Science
Information Network (CIESIN). EMAP-IM will also explore and pro-
totype procedures, standards, and technologies that will allow
EMAP to meet user needs for data many years after collection.
POC Dataset Inventory and Directory
POC Directory and Catalog Requirements
Evaluation of External Data Sources for EMAP
EMAP Guidelines for External Data Integration
November 1993
October 1993
November 1993
October 1993
Advanced Technology
Evaluation
This team provides computer science research and evaluation sup-
port to EMAP-IM. Activities include maintaining knowledge of the
state-of-the-art in technology related to EMAP information manage-
ment efforts, and facilitating smooth insertion of new technology
into the EMAP-IM infrastructure.
Available and Upcoming Products Spatial SQL (Structured Query Language) Paper August 1993
Computer Science
Direction
This team provides the primary computer and information sciences
direction for EMAP information management development efforts
and serves as a scientific and strategic planning resource to EMAP-
IM. It represents EMAP information management systems develop-
ment to the information sciences community and coordinates tech-
nical peer reviews from a computer sciences and information engi-
neering standpoint. The peer review panel consists of external
research and computer scientists who are experts in the field of
scientific information systems.
Available and Upcoming Products EMAP-IM Five-Year strategic Plan
September 1993
62
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Cooperating Institutions
The following EPA organizations are participating in the design of
EMAP information management systems:
The Office of Information and Resources Management (OIRM) of
the Office of Administrative Resources Management(OARM).
OIRM's National Data Processing Division (NDPD), Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina.
The Office of Water
The Center for Environmental Statistics of the Office of Policy,
Planning and Evaluation's Environmental Statitistics and Information
Divison (OPPE/ESID).
Current EMAP-IM system development efforts have focused on
EMAP's Estuaries and Forest Health Monitoring resource groups.
For these resource groups, EPA has cooperative partnerships with
NOAA for Estuaries and the USDA Forest Service for Forest Health
Monitoring.
Established information management standards serve as the foun-
dation for information management system development. The fol-
lowing institutions have set standards and guidelines for the major
aspects of information management and telecommunications.
Whenever possible, EMAP-IM has adopted or built upon the work
of these institutions.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Administration and Resources Management,
Office of Information Resources Management,
Information Management Data Administration
Group,
Geographic Information Systems Group,
National Data Processing Division
U.S. Department of Commerce,
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
International Standards Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
American National Standards Institute, Washington, DC.
63
-------
Integration and Assessment
Lands
Chi
Introduction
3.5 Landscape Characterization
Spatial information describing the geographic coverage and extent
of resources is important for assessing ecological status and trends.
The goal of EMAP-Landscape Characterization (EMAP-LC) is to
provide the spatial information for this evaluation. EMAP-LC's major
objectives are:
• to develop and implement a geographic reference database
(GRD),
• to develop a land-cover classification system, and
• to generate land cover information.
EMAP-LC also supports EMAP-Design and Statistics (D&S) in
sampling frame development and extent estimations, and
complements EMAP-lnformation Management in the area of spatial
data. ^
The development of a hierarchical land-cover classification system
is a critical unifying component for EMAP, as well as for other
programs within EPA and other government agencies. The EMAP
classification system is being developed in collaboration with the
U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Gap
Analysis Program (GAP), and will be compatible as much as
possible with other classification systems.
Generation of comprehensive, national land-cover information will
be accomplished at several scales and levels of detail. Land-cover
data for EMAP will support sampling frame development, resource
extent estimates, assessments, and landscape monitoring. Research
collaborators in this effort include the Fish and Wildlife Service, the
Department of Energy's Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL)
NASA, USGS, and the Global Change Research Program.
To achieve its objectives, EMAP-LC is focusing on five major
priorities:
• Developing the EMAP Geographic Reference Database (GRD).
This is the spatial data infrastructure for EMAP that will ensure
that EMAP resource groups, other partner agencies, and the
federal and scientific community can operate with the same data
infrastructure. The EMAP GRD fits into a larger federal spatial
data infrastructure. Ultimately, all federal partners will have
access to the same data layers and operate with the same level
of data quality.
• Developing an EMAP land-cover classification system. This
hierarchical system will have precisely defined classes that meet
the specifications of EMAP resource groups while facilitating
information exchange with other agencies involved in similar
efforts.
• Generating land-cover data. EMAP-LC will collaborate with other
agencies to acquire national land-cover data. In addition, EMAP-
LC will work with EMAP resource groups to identify more
detailed land-cover data that meets the needs of specific
groups.
64
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
EMAP Contact:
Geographic Reference
Database
Cooperating Institutions
• Supporting sample frame development. This effort will document
the sampling frame material and frame development strategies
being used .by each of the resource groups. EMAP-LC and
EMAP-D&S will then analyze this information to ensure frame
compatibility for integrated, multiple resource assessments.
• Supporting extent estimations. EMAP-LC, in collaboration with
EMAP-D&S, will generate estimates of resource extent at a
variety of spatial scales.
As part of its service activities for other EMAP groups, EMAP-LC is
conducting a number of special technology transfer or joint
development projects described below in the context of their major
priorities.
Denice M. Shaw
EMAP Research and Assessment Center
U.S. EPA (MD-75)
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Telephone: 919/541-2698
Geographic data are required in EMAP to provide the context for
the sampling data of the resource groups and for regional ecological
assessments. The EMAP Geographic Reference Database (GRD) is a
program-wide database for EMAP users, containing descriptions of
available data, its quality, and ownership. EMAP's GRD will also
contain certain well-documented, quality-assessed, spatial data sets.
EMAP's GRD will describe and reference spatial data at various
scales for a variety of physical, biological, and cultural themes,
including land cover, ecoregions, physiographic regions, soils,
watershed boundaries, and political boundaries.
EMAP-LC focuses on acquiring data sets that will benefit the largest
number of users. In addition, EMAP-LC will continue to develop
and refine the EMAP CIS interface as a user-friendly tool that
enables the exploration of EMAP field data and other relevant data
in a spatial context. Overall, GRD development efforts will facilitate
data sharing, appropriate use of the data, and effective data
management. EMAP-LC will work with EMAP-IM to ensure EMAP's
GRD is consistent with EMAP-IM's planning efforts.
EPA's Office of Information Resources Management (OIRM) of the
Office of Administration and Resources Management (OARM).
OIRM is providing enhancements of existing spatial data coverage
for inclusion or reference in the EMAP GRD. OIRM also is working
with EMAP-LC to develop the Agency's Spatial Data Management
Plan. OIRM's National Data Processing Division is helping to
evaluate hardware, software, and telecommunications.
U.S. Department of Interior, U.S. Geological Survey (USCS).
USGS's National Mapping Division is constructing federal data
clearinghouse from which EMAP resource groups will derive some
of their spatial data. The Water Resources Division of USGS has
base cartographic data on-line. The GRD will provide a link to this
central clearinghouse. EMAP's use of USGS data results in updates
and improvements in USCS databases. EROS Data Center, a
division of the National Mapping Division, will archive, manage, and
distribute Thematic Mapper™ and other large spatial data sets for
EMAP. In addition, USGS's Water Resources Division contributes
65
-------
Integration and Assessment
Landscape Characterization
to the EMAP's GRD by exploring the use of Internet to support
interagency communication and data exchange.
University of California-Santa Barbara (UC-SB).
UC-SB's National Center for Geographic Information Analysis is
cooperating on research issues of quality assurance for spatial data
sets.
Available and Upcoming Products EMAP cis interface
October 1993
GRD Development Plan
September 1993
Land-Cover
Classification System
Development
Cooperating Institutions
EMAP-LC and the Fish and Wildlife Service-Gap Analysis Program
(GAP) are developing a joint system that will serve as the high end
(i.e., coarse resolution) of a standard classification hierarchy for
land cover used by EMAP, GAP, and other relevant programs. At
lower levels (i.e., finer resolutions) of this common hierarchy, EMAP
resource groups and other partner programs may diverge into their
own resource class divisions to meet their specialized research
needs. A dictionary is being developed that identifies and describes
the classification systems currently in use by the various resource
groups and compares each of them to various classifications.
U.S. Department of Interior, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS),.
National Mapping Division.
The USGS National Mapping Division is currently developing a
master resource classification system for all federal agencies, into
which the efforts of EMAP and GAP will link.
Available and Upcoming Products Land-Cover Classification Dictionary
December 1993
Land Cover Generation
Land-cover data at a range of scales are critical to meeting EMAP's
objectives of estimating condition and extent of the Nation's
ecological resources. Because partner agencies have similar needs
for land-cover data, EMAP has made a commitment to lead an
interagency team in the development of a national land-cover
database using Landsat Thematic Mapper™ satellite imagery. EMAP-
LC will also identify and access satellite imagery at a variety of other
scales, as well as aerial photography, in order to meet specific
needs of individual EMAP resource groups.
The Land Cover Generation project comprises six major
components:
• Planning and Coordination. A plan will be developed to suggest
procedures .and strategies to be implemented;
• Classification System. The EMAP Classification System will be
further refined and assessed;
• Data Acquisition. The legal aspects of data licensing and sharing
will be investigated as well as the coordination of data
acquisition with ongoing or planned efforts by other federal or
state programs;
• Data Processing. The algorithms and operations will'be
addressed and technically peer reviewed;
66
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Cooperating Institutions
Sampling Frame
Development
• Accuracy Assessment. Accuracy assessment procedures will
be tested and refined;
• Data Management. Efforts will be explored to collaborate with
other federal agencies who have effectively managed large
volumes of data.
U.S. Department of Interior, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS),.
National Mapping Division, EROS Data Center, Sioux Falls, South
Dakota.
EROS is supplying and classifying AVHRR Imagery (1 square
kilometer resolution) for use by EMAP.
North American Landscape Classification (NALC Consortium and
Similar Joint Efforts.
NALC (composed of USGS, NASA, and EPA) is acquiring for
EMAP's use historic multi-spectral scanner 'images from cameras
used on early Landsat satellites that produced pictures with 80-
meter resolution. This data will be tested for its ability to produce
meaningful change detection results.
In addition to NALC, an informal association of FWS-GAP, USGS's
National Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program, the EROS
Data Center, and NOAA's Coastwatch-Change Analysis Program
are working with EMAP-LC to contribute areas of expertise in
acquiring, processing and managing Thematic Mapper™ data (30
meter resolution). A similar group, involving EROS, NASA, FWS,
BLM, NALC, USDA Forest Service, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, (FEMA, and the Army Corps of Engineers are working with
EMAP-LC to purchase 800 scenes of SPOT (a French satellite,
which produces images with 10-meter resolution) imagery in the
north central United States.
Regions and States.
EPA Regions III and VI are helping to coordinate acquisition and
processing of Thematic Mapper™ data for their regions and states
within their regions.
The states of Illinois, Pennsylvania, and New Mexico are helping to
acquire and classify Thematic Mapper™ data for EMAP and other
programs.
A sampling frame specifies the individual units of a population from
which samples may be selected. Currently, the EMAP resource
groups, each working independently with one or more federal
agencies, have identified short-term solutions for frame
development. EMAP-LC will compare each of these solutions and
identify and clarify issues resulting from the differences. The frame
development activity has four major objectives:
• To understand sampling frames being used and to anticipate
their limitations for making holistic assessments of resource
conditions;
• To develop approaches for sampling frames that will allow
EMAP to minimize these limitations in the short-term;
• To develop a strategy for defining a common EMAP sampling
frame, potentially based on a nationwide land cover database;
and
67
-------
Integration and Assessment
Lands
Chi
To provide support to the Wetlands resource group for
continued efforts in the Prairie Potholes digitization effort.
Available and Upcoming Products
Extent Estimation
Draft Report on Resource Group Sampling
Frames
December 1993
The second objective of EMAP is to estimate the geographic
coverage and extent of resources with known statistical confidence.
Currently, EMAP resource groups are using distinct and potentially
incompatible processes for estimating the distribution and extent of
resources. Potential discrepancies between the processes include
diverse data sources, methods, statistical designs, and classification
systems. EMAP-LC will identify, document, and classify these
processes, and then guide the strategy for producing integrated
extent estimations that are compatible across resource groups.
The extent estimation activity has three main objectives:
• To document the current extent estimation methods proposed
by the resource groups well enough to anticipate difficulties that
may preclude comprehensive, national estimations of resource
extent;
• To develop an approach that will allow EMAP to minimize these
difficulties in the short term;
• To develop strategies for extent estimation based on probability
sampling as well as synoptic data.
Available and Upcoming Products Draft Report (Proposed
December 1993
Chesapeake Bay
Watershed Pilot
Figure 14. The Chesapeake Bay
Watershed
Cooperating Institutions
The Comprehensive Chesapeake Bay Plan will demonstrate how the
five major components of EMAP-LC—Classification, Land Cover
Generation, Extent, Frame Support, and the Geographic Reference
Database—may be integrated into the overall Landscape
Characterization plan, and applied to the resource groups
represented in the Chesapeake Bay. This location was selected
because of the availability of land-cover data at multiple scales and
the availability of ancillary spatial data. This project will include
collaboration with resource groups, EPA Region III, the Chesapeake
Bay Program Office, the Mid-Atlantic Highlands Assessment
(MAHA), and the six states that have land in the watershed.
Thematic Mapper™ data for the Chesapeake Bay watershed were
classified using the proposed national classification system. It is
important to the continued development of the EMAP land-cover
dataset that the quality of the classified Thematic Mapper™ data be
assessed. This task will be undertaken by two collaborating
universities; results will be systematically documented in the pilot
metadata system developed for the Chesapeake Bay Watershed
project.
Towson State University, Towson, Maryland, and Pennsylvania
State University, State College, Pennsylvania.
Both universities are conducting assessments of the quality of the
EMAP classification in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed pilot project.
68
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Available and Upcoming Products
Resource Group Pilot
Support
R-EMAP Technical
Assistance
Report: Accuracy Assessment Protocols for
EMAP
Report: Standard Methods for Thematic
Mapper™ Classification (at a regional scale)
Chesapeake Bay Watershed Thematic
Mapper™ Land Cover Characterization Pilot
Plan
Chesapeake Bay Watershed Final Report
August 1993
August 1993
July 1993
November 1993
EMAP-LG will provide continued support for three ongoing
resource group pilot projects. One project involves remotely-
sensed indicator development for EMAP-Forest Health Monitoring,
another involves photointerpretation for EMAP-Agroecosystems,
and the third involves digitizing for EMAP-Wetlands sampling frame
development.
The EMAP-FHM task involves developing and testing remotely-
sensed indicators of forest conditions in the state of Georgia by
comparing measurements from high-resolution aerial photography
with field indication measurements. The objective of this project is
to refine aerial forest monitoring techniques to serve as an option to
costly ground-based indicator measurements.
The EMAP-Agroecosystems task involves acquiring and preparing
imagery, establishing control points, and generating land use/land
cover data in the state of North Carolina.
For EMAP-Wetlands, EMAP-LC will provide support to complete the
digitizing of the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) maps for the
Prairie Potholes region, so that the wetland sampling frame can be
properly drawn.
The Regional-EMAP (R-EMAP) project was developed as a
partnership between EMAP and EPA's regional offices and states to
promote the use of EMAP technology, methods, and concepts m
regional, state, and local monitoring efforts. Seven R-EMAP
proposals have been initiated this year (see Section 4 of this
document). Regional office CIS teams have expressed interest in
coordinating with the larger EMAP CIS infrastructure for standards,
data sharing, interface development, and communication. Such
coordination will provide the regional CIS R-EMAP efforts with
support that will benefit them individually and provide consistency
among the R-EMAP projects.
R-EMAP will hold two yearly workshops in addition to monthly
conference calls for the R-EMAP CIS staff. EMAP-LC also will
distribute the EMAP CIS interface to the R-EMAP CIS staff with
guidance for incorporating their respective data sets.
69
-------
Integration and Assessment
Qualit
Introduction
EMAP Contact
3.6 Quality Assurance
The EMAP-Quality Assurance (EMAP-QA) component ensures that
EPA quality assurance guidelines are reflected in EMAP research
and management procedures. EMAP-QA provides guidance to the
EMAP resource groups on data review, validation, and verification
requirements and on documenting data quality objectives for
emerging research fields such as ecological indicators and
geographic information processing. These efforts ensure that
independent research results can be used and compared.
Linda Kirkland
U.S. EPA (RD-680)
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
(202) 260-5775
Development of EMAP
Data Quality Objectives
The EMAP-Quality
Assurance Plan, and
the EMAP Management
Systems Review
Quality Assurance,
Configuration
Management, and
Security Planning
Support for
EMAP-lnformation
Management
Available and Upcoming Products
EMAP-QA is working to develop guidance on requirements for
documenting research data quality goals and validation criteria in
planning documents for data collection operations. EMAP-QA
requires internal guidance specific to its needs that can serve as a
basis for data quality objectives (DQO) training. This project will
develop examples of the DQO process to be applied as examples
of indicators from past EMAP monitoring projects.
EMAP-QA is developing a management plan to address
requirements for planning, implementing, and assessing the quality
of its environmental data collection operations. Implementation of
the Quality Management Plan is evaluated through EMAP
Management Systems Reviews (MSR). The Management Systems
Review protocol prepared for EMAP-Forest Health Monitoring will
provide guidance to EMAP-QA both for its evaluation of the
operating plan and in providing feedback and monitoring of the
program.
Quality Assurance functions assuring adequate access to
information about quality assurance and quality control enable
quality assessments to include security and techniques of
configuration management as part of the database architecture
These functions will enable EMAP-QA to assist EMAP-lnformation
Management in responding to quality management requirements for
EMAP. This joint project will also help resource groups plan and
develop basic information management capabilities through
prototyping and technology transfer.
EMAP Quality Management Plan
September 1993
Quality Assurance Proof-of-Concept
Prototype
September 1993
Plan for Forest MSR and Implementation
Draft 1994 Quality Assurance Annual Report
and Workplan
September 1993
September 1993
70
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Introduction
3.7 Methods
The EMAP-Methods component is identifying, standardizing, and
ensuring the consistent documentation of sampling and
measurement methods used by the EMAP resource groups in order
to maximize the comparability of estimates for use in regional and
national assessments. Activities include the development of a
program-wide methods database to document existing procedures
for measuring given parameters and to track the introduction of and
changes to program methodologies. EMAP-Methods also
demonstrates methods applications and taxonomic identification
techniques.
EMAP Contact
Gary Collins
U.S. EPA Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
26 W. Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268-1525
(513) 569-7174
EMAP-Methods
Guidance Document
Currently, methods manuals developed and used by the various
EMAP resource groups are in various formats and stages of
development. EMAP-Methods will produce a standard format for
such methods manuals based on ORD standards and with input
from EMAP Technical Directors and Technical Coordinators. The
resulting manuals will provide methods specifications for projects in
the pilot, demonstration, and implementation phases of
development.
Methods Data Base
Within EMAP, there is the potential for resource groups to duplicate
efforts by evaluating essentially identical methods. To avoid
duplicative effort, EMAP-Methods is developing a database that will
be tied to the EMAP-lndicators database, and both will become part
of the EMAP metadata. Ultimately, EMAP-Methods will identify and
organize the sampling and measurement methods being used by
EMAP resource groups to assure comparability of estimates of
environmental condition across groups and through time.
Methods Validation
Protocols
This activity involves developing acceptable protocols for
evaluating both field and observational sampling methods and
chemical or physical analytical methods. These protocols can then
be adapted to EMAP requirements. This project will standardize the
pilot, demonstration, and implementation phase methods
requirements.
71
-------
Integration and Assessment
Methods
Establish a Taxonomic
Coding System for
EMAP
Available and Upcoming Products
As an ecological as well as a biological monitoring program, EMAP
needs a system for classifying animals and plants. A taxonomic
coding system will not only benefit the EMAP resource groups, but
also simplify tasks for EMAP-lnformation Management. This coding
system will reduce the likelihood that resource groups will use
incompatible coding systems.
Taxonomic Coding Systems Options
Document
July 1993
Draft Methods Format Guidance
August 1993
Preliminary EMAP Methods Database
October 1993
Draft Validation Protocols for
Chemical/Physical Analysis Methods
November 1993
72
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Introduction
3.8 Logistics
EMAP-Logistics assists EMAP resource groups with planning and
implementing fieldwork. Activities include developing specific
logistics plans for each resource group and identifying common
field procedures among groups in order to achieve maximum
efficiency and cost effectiveness. This component provides
guidance for all aspects of field logistics, including pre-field planning,
crew training, site access permission, equipment acquisition and
maintenance, sample tracking, safety, and public relations. The
planned Geographic Positioning System (GPS) project will also help
EMAP-Logistics communicate with and support EMAP-lnformation
Management.
In addition to facilitating field operations for the various resource
groups by activities such as training, equipment acquisition and site
access, EMAP-Logistics is focusing on two specific projects to
benefit EMAP resource groups: the publication of previously
written EMAP training guidance, and guidance on the use of GPS.
EMAP Contact
Daniel Heggem
U.S. EPA Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, Nevada 89193-3478
(702) 798-2278
Geographic Positioning
Systems (GPS)
EMAP is evaluating the use of GPS which is used by EMAP to
identify sampling locations with improved accuracy for repeated
visitation. This project will entail a thorough investigation of GPS
based on the experience of the EMAP and OIRM CIS workgroups,
which have conducted both field testing and literature reviews. The
recommendations which come from this investigation will be the
basis for a GPS guidance document for use by the EMAP resource
groups. This document will include the EPA locational data policy
and the recent guidance released by the Office of Information
Resources Management, and will also include recommendations for
GPS equipment, training, operations, and data storage and use
procedures. In addition, examples of a range of GPS applications,
as successfully applied in the field by EMAP resource groups, will
be included in the EMAP-Logistics guidance.
Available and Upcoming Products paper on EMAP Training
September 1993
EMAP CPS Document
September 1993
73
-------
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Section 4.0 EMAP Program Coordination
Contents of Section 4
4.1 Regional-EMAP (R-EMAP) 76
Introduction 76
R-EMAP Projects. 77
Region I: Fish Tissue Contamination in the State
of Maine 77
Region II: Sediment Quality of the NY/NJ Harbor
System and Regional Validation of
EMAP-Like Indicators of Sediment Quality....??
Region III: Surface Water Quality Indicators
In the Mid-Atlantic Highlands 78
Region VI: Characterization of Toxics in
Selected Texas Estuaries 79
Region VII: Estimating the Status of the
Health of Fisheries 79
Region K: Assessment of Aquatic and Riparian
Ecosystems in a Highly Modified,
Agriculturally Influenced Environment 80
Region X: Biological Assessment of Wadeable
Streams in the Coast Range Ecoregion and
the Yakima River Basin 80
4.2 International Activities 81
Introduction 81
Earthwatch 82
Technical Assistance 83
4.3 Arctic Programs 84
Introduction 84
Support for Arctic Contaminants
Research Program (ACRP) 84
Indicators of Organic Contaminants 85
Pilot Study of Organic and Inorganic
Contaminants 85
4.4 Administrative Liaison 86
Introduction 86
Atmospheric and Deposition Data 86
Acquisition and Interpretation of Climate Data...86
Regional Climate Indicators 86
Risk Assessment Forum 87
Issue Papers 87
Risk Assessment Case Studies 87
Introduction
Program Coordination projects are organized to address many of
the program-wide communication and client service requirements of
EMAP. The largest Program Coordination element is the Regional-
EMAP program, which is a special program of targeted resources to
assist EPA regional offices in applying and adapting EMAP data and
methods to the policy management and decision-making needs of
administrators in the regional offices. The Regional-EMAP project is
organized from the EMAP Research and Assessment Center in
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, where it is able to take
advantage of many of the diverse scientific and technical resources
which make up EMAP.
EMAP-lnternational provides EMAP information and technical
resources to several bilateral and multilateral environmental
initiatives, including especially the environmental monitoring
activities of the United Nations Environmental Programme.
EMAP Program Coordination also supports research being
conducted as part of the United States' contribution to the Arctic
Contaminants Research Program. This support includes both
logistics assistance and adaptation of EMAP methods to the special
needs of the Arctic program.
Program Coordination supports all of the resource groups by
obtaining air quality, atmospheric deposition, general climate data
and support for research in regional climatic indicators. Program
Coordination activities also include direct support for the Risk
Assessment Forum in addition to individual collaboration
agreements between the Risk Assessment Forum and individual
resource and integration groups.
75
-------
Program Coordination
Regional-EMAP
Introduction
Figure 15 The Ten EPA Regions
4.1 Regional-EMAP (R-EMAP)
R-EMAP, the Regional Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
Program, is an evolving partnership between EMAP and EPA's
regional offices that promotes the use of EMAP technology,
methods, and concepts at regional, state, and local scales.
R-EMAP's objectives are to
• evaluate and improve EMAP concepts for state and local
use,
• assess the applicability of EMAP indicators at differing
scales, and
• demonstrate EMAP's utility for resolving issues of
importance to EPA regions and states.
Through R-EMAP, each region proposes to apply an EMAP
monitoring and assessment approach to high-priority projects
identified by the region's comparative risk assessment process.
R-EMAP projects are proposed by the EPA Regional Environmental
Services Division Directors, are peer reviewed both internally and
externally by an independent group of scientists, and are approved
and funded by EMAP.
The brief project descriptions which follow identify the activities
being undertaken by the seven regional projects that have planned
field operations beginning in FY93. Three EPA Regional Offices (IV,
V and VIII) are currently involved in planning activities for projects
which will begin field operations in FY94.
R-EMAP projects are designed to yield useful information for
decision-makers within one to two years. R-EMAP activities will
assist in demonstrating the applicability of the EMAP approach, not
only for national and regional assessments, but for smaller-scale,
short-term applications. In addition, the enhanced interaction
among EMAP, EPA regional offices, states, and local governments
will help to fill the gap between the national EMAP program and the
states. Since each region selects the R-EMAP projects from a list of
previously-identified risk-based problems, the program will enhance
EPA's effort to reduce ecological risk by utilizing data of known
scientific quality in the decision-making process.
EMAP Contact
Rick A. Linthurst
EMAP Research and Assessment Center
U.S. EPA (MD-75)
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
(919) 541-4909
76
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
R-EMAP Projects
Region I: Fish Tissue
Contamination in the State of Maine
This Region 1 project is designed to determine the status of fish
tissue contamination in high-value lakes within the State of Maine.
The implications of tissue concentrations in terms of ecological risk,
and the percentage and numbers of lakes in Maine at risk will be
evaluated. The project will also help to determine what lake
characteristics are associated with sensitivity to contamination. This
project will complement Region I's strategic planning activities,
especially in the area of resource protection, as well as Maine's
efforts to initiate a comprehensive toxic monitoring program.
Cooperating Institutions
Maine Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), Augusta,
ME.
The Maine DEP provides field crews to collect fish, sediment and
water samples. DEP will also publish the project's final report.
Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, Augusta, ME.
The Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife is also providing
field crews for the data collections phases of the Region I project.
Maine Health and Environmental Testing Laboratory, Augusta, ME.
The state's testing laboratory will provide the analyses for PCBs,
pesticides, selected metals, and miscellaneous other parameters.
Detailed Work Plan
September, 1993
Available and Upcoming Products Statistical Summary of Data Collected in 1993
May, 1994
Final Assessment Report
March, 1995
Region II: Sediment Quality of the
NY/NJ Harbor System and
Regional Validation of EMAP-Like
Indicators of Sediment Quality
Recent reviews of existing data suggest that a number of sites in the
New York/New Jersey harbor estuary have contaminated
sediments, although the actual extent is unknown. This Region II
project will provide information on the extent and magnitude of
sediment degradation throughout the New York/New jersey harbor
system and within specific sub-basins, helping to develop a needed
sediment management strategy. The project will apply EMAP's
sampling design at a suitably enhanced resolution to assure that
results are capable of conveying the extent of sediment
contamination with known statistical confidence. Field and
laboratory methods will be comparable with EMAP's standard
systems to ensure that results can be related to conditions in other
parts of the country.
Cooperating Institutions
NewYork/New Jersey Harbor Estuary Program (NY/NJ HEP)
The NY/NJ Harbor Estuary Program provides matching funds and
management support to the Region II R-EMAP project.
U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA).
NOAA will serve as a cooperating source of technical assistance to
the NY/NJ Harbor Estuary Program, and will provide data from a
77
-------
Program Coordination
Regional-EMAP
Available and Upcoming Products
similar NOAA-sponsored study of sediment contamination in
Newark Bay.
State environmental agencies in New Jersey and New York
Staff and resources from both states will be made available for
technical assistance and other support to the program.
Hudson River Foundation, Kingston, NY.
The Hudson River Foundation will provide technical assistance to
the project through the NY/NJ HEP, and will also provide
administrative support in the form of contract administration for
project RFPs and some R-EMAP chemical analyses.
Region II R-EMAP Design Workshop Summary August 1993
Region II R-EMAP Statistical Summary March 1994
Sediment Quality Assessment—Final Report
June 1995
Region III: Surface Water Quality
Indicators in the Mid-Atlantic
Highlands
In this project, Region III will conduct field investigations and sample
collection at reference sites of known environmental condition,
indicator testing sites, and probability-based estimate sites. The
project will establish biological reference conditions of the Central
Appalachian Ridge and Valley ecoregion, define the range of natural
biological variability of the ecoregion, quantify the differences
between conditions in the ridges and the valleys, and define the
current biological status of Ridge and Valley streams. The results of
this project will also assist EPA in identifying associations between
impaired conditions and potential causal factors, and between the
current status and the results of EPA's 1986 National Stream
Survey. This project is also part of a planned integrated ecological
assessment of forests, streams, and agroecosystems in the Mid-
Atlantic Highlands in FY94 and following years.
Cooperating Institutions
Available and Upcoming Products
Institutions cooperating in the Mid-Atlantic Highlands Assessment
(MAHA) include
• divisions of EPA's Region III;
• water pollution control and wildlife protection agencies in
the states of Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West
Virginia; these agencies provide lead biologists for field
crews and help provide access to monitoring sites.
• other federal agencies, including especially the Fish and
Wildlife Service regional office in Amherst, Massachusetts;
FWS provided technical assistance and field staff to support
fish sampling activities;
• universities in the region that have been involved in
indicator review and will be involved in assessment
implementation.
Annual Statistical Summary of Data Collected in July 1 994
FY93
March 1994
Pilot Implementation of Regional Assessment
Assessment Reports
April 1995
78
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Region VI: Characterization of Toxic
Pollutants in Selected Texas
Estuaries
Cooperating Institutions
Region VI will collect samples from 53 sites using the EMAP
probability-based sampling design and analyze them using EMAP
methods. These samples will be used to estimate the extent of toxic
pollutants in sediment and fish at the sites. The results of this
survey will directly answer region and state questions regarding
potential problems. The project will also provide direct empirical
evidence to test the EMAP statistical sampling system's ability to
adapt to different levels of spatial resolution.
Texas Gulf Coast Research Laboratory, Galveston, Texas.
The Gulf Coast Research Laboratory in Galveston will process all
sediment samples for benthic macro!nvertebrates.
The Geochemical and Environmental Research Group (GERG),
Texas A&M University, Lubbock, Texas.
GERG will provide all field sampling for this project, and will conduct
chemical analyses of the water, sediment and tissue samples, using
the same tests and standards applied to EMAP-Estuaries monitoring
in the Louisianian Province.
Available and Upcoming Products
Characterization of Toxic Pollutants in Selected June 1994
Texas Estuaries: Data and Conclusions
Region VII: Estimating the Status of
the Health of Fisheries
Region VII will measure the quality of fisheries that fall within the
Region's four-state area of Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska.
The project will study the associations between fisheries quality and
the habitat and chemical or physical indicator data. This project will
provide a cost-effective approach to assessing the condition of
fisheries and will allow EPA to evaluate environmental indicators.
Cooperating Institutions
Available and Upcoming Products
Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks, Topeka, Kansas.
The Kansas DWP is organizing and overseeing two field crews to
collect all of the field data for Kansas, and is donating part of the
costs of personnel and equipment.
Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality, Lincoln, Nebraska
and the Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Jefferson City,
Missouri.
The two state departments are overseeing the collection of state
data on fisheries by groups at their respective state universities.
Measuring the Health of Fisheries in
Region VII— Final Report
March 1996
Region IX: Assessment of Aquatic
and Riparian Ecosystems in a
Highly Modified, Agriculturally
Influenced Environment
Cooperating Institutions
Region IX has identified agriculture as a significant source of
ecological risk in the region. Since EPA's programs are not designed
to address agriculture in a coordinated or resource-intensive way,
Region IX developed a study to evaluate the current condition of
aquatic biota in the agricultural area of the California Central Valley.
This project will facilitate short-term policy decisions to protect
surface waters. In addition, it will contribute to the formulation to
scientifically sound, long-term monitoring strategies.
California Fish and Game Agency, Sacramento, California. This
agency will conduct field sampling and Fish and Game Laboratory
79
-------
Program Coordination
Regional-EMAP
staff will sort and identify organisms to the lowest possible
taxonomic level for the macroinvertebrate indicator.
Available and Upcoming Products
Interim Report
Summer 1994
Final Report
Fall 1995
Region X: Biological Assessment
of Wadeable Streams in the Coast
Range Ecoregion and the Yakima
River Basin
Region X plans to conduct a long-term monitoring and assessment
effort that will collect fish and macroinvertebrate assemblage
samples as well as physical habitat and selected water column
chemistry parameters in wadeable streams. These samples will help
EPA's regional office to judge the status of first- through third-order
streams in the Coast Range Ecoregion and the Yakima River Basin.
The Region also will evaluate the possibility of identifying
associations between the status of these streams and surrounding
land uses.
Cooperating Institutions
Available and Upcoming Products
Oregon Department of Environmental Chemistry, Eugene, Oregon.
The Department will assist in collecting fish and macroinvertebrate
assemblage samples as well as physical habitat and selected water
column chemistry parameters in wadeable streams for the Coast
Range Ecoregion. The Departmental laboratory will also process the
samples collected and perform the taxonomic identifications of
macroinvertebrates.
Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, Washington.
The Department will assist in collecting fish and macroinvertebrate
assemblage samples as well as physical habitat and selected water
column chemistry parameters in wadeable streams in the Coast
Range Ecoregion and the Yakima River Basin. The Department will
also process samples from the field collection.
Region X Pilot Study Report
April 1994
First-Year Monitoring Final Report
September 1995
Second-Year Monitoring Final Report
August 1996
80
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Introduction
4.2 International Activities
While EMAP focuses on the environment in the United States, it
recognizes the interdependency of the world's economic and
ecological resources. Consequently, the Program established
EMAP-lnternational to pursue the following activities:
• Cooperate with the United Nations (UN) and other international
organizations in planning and conducting global-scale
assessments of ecological condition. These studies will utilize
data from existing monitoring networks to assess the condition
of the world's resources.
• Provide technical assistance on design and indicators
development for countries desiring to establish their own
ecological monitoring programs.
Several countries including those of the Baltic and Eastern European
regions have requested EPA assistance to develop their own
ecological monitoring programs. Thus, EMAP-lnternational's short-
term objectives include
• developing a framework for specific long-term ecological
monitoring plans for these regions;
• providing technical assistance to the regions that want to
establish a probability-based ecological monitoring program;
and
• testing indicators in the environments of regions with a variety
of ecological stresses.
EMAP-lnternational supports projects that facilitate cooperation
between countries and institutions to ensure that ecological
resources are monitored and maintained in an optimal manner. The
goals of EMAP-lnternational are to encourage the development of
global-scale environmental monitoring networks and to extend the
EMAP concept on an international basis.
EMAP Contact
Harold U. Kibby
U.S. EPA Environmental Research Laboratory
200 SW 35th Street
Corvallis, OR 97333
Telephone: (503) 754-4679
81
-------
Program Coordination
International Activities
Earthwatch
Earthwatch is an outgrowth of the UN's Global Environmental
Monitoring Systems (GEMS) within the United Nations
Environmental Programme (UNEP). In collaboration with the
international scientific community and other relevant organizations,
Earthwatch gathers, integrates, analyzes, and reports data and
information about the environment. Earthwatch uses this
information to
• provide the international community with authoritative
assessments on the condition of specific components of the
environment in response to specific policy and management
questions;
• identify global and regional monitoring and assessment needs;
• coordinate global and regional monitoring and assessment
programs; and
• provide the UN and member nations advice on emerging
environmental threats.
EPA will participate in Earthwatch's activities to ensure the
compatibility of EMAP approaches and data with that from other
countries and to provide leadership for conducting international
global environmental assessments. Joint activities include
coordinating and defining a set of indicators for describing and
following trends in the condition of the environment, identifying
relevant policy questions for further analysis, establishing a data
base of existing monitoring and assessment programs, identifying
additional monitoring needs, and recommending appropriate
sampling designs.
Cooperating Institutions
Available and Upcoming Products
United Nations Environment Programme, Global Environmental
Monitoring Systems (UNEP/GEMS), Nairobi, Kenya.
Precise terms of the relationship between UNEP/GEMS and EMAP
are still being defined, but, in general, EMAP will serve as a
consultant to the United Nations' program for the selection of
indicators of ecological condition.
Database on Existing Monitoring and
Assessment Programs
July 1994
Report on Recommended Environmental
Indicators
November 1995
82
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Technical Assistance
Cooperating Institutions
Monitoring networks provide quantitative, scientific assessments of
the complex effects of stressors on ecosystems, and are important
tools for determining the condition of the environment. Currently,
countries and programs are developing new and improved
monitoring networks at a rapid pace, and EPA anticipates that each
network has the potential to improve on some aspect of monitoring
and assessment science.
EMAP-lnternational will supply technical assistance to other
countries on a first-come, first-served basis, providing that the
major portion of resources is covered by funding outside of EMAP.
Three different levels of technical advice may be provided,
depending on the nature of the request. These levels are
• a sample grid and a description of EMAP's design concept to
any country that requests the information,
• training on frame development and selection of specific sample
points for countries with capabilities to conduct continuous
monitoring and assessment programs in the future, and
• a hands-on workshop led by a team of experts to explain the
EMAP design, field methods, and suggested indicators that
specific regions may want to develop.
EMAP will also evaluate the potential of other networks to improve
specific elements of EMAP, and the program will implement
modifications as appropriate.
Bowling Green University, Bowling Green, Ohio.
A proposal is being evaluated for Bowling Green to provide
technical assistance to environmental protection programs in
countries around the Baltic Sea.
83
-------
Program Coordination
4.3 Arctic Programs
Introduction
EMAP Contact:
Scientists throughout the world are increasingly aware of the
importance of the Arctic's fragile ecosystems and the risks for these
systems from various human activities. The major problems for
Arctic ecosystems are
• atmospheric transport and deposition of toxic pollutants
(including acidic deposition);
• releases of, and exposure to, radioactive materials;
• industrialization (especially resource extraction activities, such
as mining, smelting, and petroleum production);
• release of pollutants into marine systems; and
• threats from global warming.
To address these issues, EMAP will provide information on
monitoring designs to the eight circumarctic nations that constitute
the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program (AMAP). The
objectives of these countries are to
• document concentrations of Arctic contaminants;
• evaluate recent history and probable sources of contaminants;
• determine possible food web effects and biological response
indicators; and
• interpret results from an international perspective.
Three specific activities are currently proposed for direct
participation by EMAP in the Arctic Contaminants Research
Program. These are described below.
Dixon Landers
U.S. EPA -Environmental Research Laboratory
200 Southwest 35th Street
Corvallis, OR 97333
503//754-4600
Support for Arctic
Contaminants Research
Program (ACRP)
Indicators of Organic
Contaminants
The Arctic Contaminants Research Program (ACRP) is a research
initiative of EPA's Office of Environmental Processes and Effects
Research (OEPER), as part of the United States contribution to the
Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program. EMAP will provide
support for helicopter and aircraft operations to sample Arctic
habitats for the status and extent studies of the ACRP. This portion
of the ACRP uses an EMAP grid to identify sampling sites for a
probabilistic study of contaminant concentrations. Aircraft are also
used for food web and sediment coring studies that are performed
on a less extensive geographic scale.
Organic contaminants are one of the key problem areas for Arctic
ecosystems. EMAP will help to develop and implement appropriate,
quality assured, analytical methods for analyzing a suite of
indicators of organic contaminants of lichen, moss, soil, sediment,
84
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
fish and mammals most likely to occur in Arctic environments, asks
to support indicator development include
« analyzing bulk samples to gain experience with general
organic contamination problems in the Arctic,
• identifying candidate organic contaminants to be studied,
• analyzing the routine samples, and
• reporting the data.
Cooperating Institutions
Pilot Study of Organic
and Inorganic
Contaminants
Cooperating Institutions
Available and Upcoming Products
Texas A&M, Lubbock, Texas.
Texas A&M is the lead cooperating institution for the development
of indicators of organic contaminants for the ACRP.
EMAP will design and implement a probability survey based on the
EMAP grid to determine the current status of U.S. Arctic terrestrial
resources with regard to inorganic and organic contaminants.
Activities include selecting and sampling 35 sites per year from this
sample frame for lichens, mosses, and soils; interpreting and
publishing a study to address issues of spatial and temporal
variability, and establishing the growth rate of target lichen species
based on growth studies already underway. EMAP's spatial
approaches will demonstrate the flexibility of the grid to address
environmental management issues at a sub-regional scale.
Oregon State University (OSU),. Corvallis, Oregon.
OSU has the lead for the development of probability survey
methods for determining the status of organic and inorganic
contaminants for the ACRP.
Draft of Variability Paper
June 1993
Lichen Growth Study Preliminary Results
September 1993
85
-------
Program Coordination
Other Coordination
Introduction
4.4 Administrative Liaison
In addition to the Regional-EMAP projects and the program's
international activities, EMAP Program Coordination also involves
supporting the monitoring and assessment activities of the resource
and cross-cutting groups by providing administrative support and
common information resources that are used by all groups, such as
climate and air deposition data and coordination with the Agency's
Risk Assessment Forum. Administrative Liaison also provides
general support services (such as publishing the EMAP Monitor
and the annual EMAP Project Descriptions), and provides support
to the program-wide peer review process.
The sections below describe EMAP activities to acquire of air and
climate data and to support the Agency-wide Risk Assessment
Forum.
EMAP Contact:
Atmospheric and Acid
Deposition Data
Thomas L. Baugh
EMAP Headquarters
U.S. EPA (RD-680)
401 M Street SW
Washington, DC 20460
202/260-8936
EMAP is supporting existing and new ozone and acid deposition
monitoring sites under the Clean Air Status and Trends Network
(CASTNET). The purpose of this network is to collect deposition
and air quality data throughout the country, enabling the
exploration of relationships between ecosystem condition and
status with trends in air quality. CASTNET is providing EMAP
resource groups with resulting data on atmospheric pollutants over
broad geographic areas.
Acquisition and Interpretation of
Climate Data
To improve its ability to detect temporal trends, characterize
changes in status, and establish associations between ecological
condition and human induced stress, EMAP must account for
climate variability. To do so, EMAP is obtaining data from the
National Weather Service, in a format which can support the
exploration of associations between observed ecological conditions
and selected, large-scale climatic stresses. This activity will
determine the needs of EMAP's resource groups for climate data,
and will assemble and interpret climate data as a stressor of
ecosystems.
Regional Climate Indicators
This activity is intended to improve understanding of the
relationship between regional climate characteristics (means and
variability) and selected indicators of ecosystem condition using
state-of-science methods and data. The activity will evaluate
proposed climate indicators to determine if they meet the following
criteria: 6
• They are unambiguously interpretable,
• They are responsive at a regional scale,
• They possess a high signal-to-noise ratio, and
86
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Risk Assessment Forum
1
SK ASSESSMENT FOF
UM
Issue Papers
• They are relatively stable throughout the indexing period(s).
By staying abreast of the rapid changes in nationwide weather-
monitoring technology, EMAP will have access to increased data for
monitoring and assessment.activities.
The collection and acquisition of all of the above data (air quality,
deposition, and climate) require cooperating with many other
organizations including federal agencies (the Departments of
Interior, Energy, and Defense); state and local governments; the
governments of Canada, Mexico, and Europe; and international
groups such as the UN's World Meteorological Organization.
As a fundamental component of the Office of Research and
Development (ORD) Ecological Risk Assessment Program, EMAP is
contributing to the development of ecological risk assessment
guidelines through ORD's Risk Assessment Forum(RAF). RAF
recently published its Framework for Ecological Risk Assessment to
offer starting principles and a simple structure as a basis for later
Agency-wide guidance on ecological risk assessment. RAF is
expanding the Framework's principles through the development of
issue papers and case studies, including two EMAP case studies.
RAF is also developing an interactive training course for risk
assessors to explore framework principles.
RAF is developing eight issue papers to provide a bridge between
the basic principles of the Framework and more detailed guidance
to be provided in future Agency-wide ecological risk assessment
guidelines. Topics for the issue papers are
• ecological significance;
• conceptual model development;
• characterizing exposures, disturbances, and the stress
regime;
• effects characterization;
• biological stressors;
• ecological recovery;
• uncertainty in ecological risk assessment; and
• risk characterization.
To ensure the issue papers are relevant to EMAP, RAF has included
EMAP-recommended scientists as team members in the
development of the issue papers. Issue papers will be peer-
reviewed at a series of workshops, revised, then published in
FY94.
Risk Assessment Case Studies
EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) recently concurred with the
RAF's plans to continue and expand the EMAP-funded case studies
developed in 1991 and 1992. The case studies provide
descriptions of research that will contribute to the development of
future guidance and will offer insight into the ecological risk
assessment process. Six case studies are presently under
87
-------
Program Coordination
Other Coordinatio
development, including two from EMAP concerning estuaries and
arid ecosystems.
Available and Upcoming Products Fllst Case Study Report
July 1993
Second Case Study
Fall 1993
Issue Paper Workshop Reports
Winter 1993
88
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Appendices
Appendix A. Resource Monitoring and
Research Groups: Implementation
Schedule FY93-97
Appendix B. Integration and
Assessment Groups; Implementation
Schedule FY93-97
Appendix C. Cooperating Federal
Agencies
Appendix D. Cooperating State and
Local Agencies
Appendix E. Cooperating Universities
and Non-Governmental Organizations
89
-------
^l*>* Resource Groups Implementation Schedule
Appendix A: Resource Monitoring and Research Groups
• EPA Regions *<• indeed by number in each panel FY93 - 97 llTIDlementation Schedule*
| Resource Group | C™gJ3ear FYT994 FY1995 FY19>6 | FY1997 |
Field Actlvitle
Pilo
Estuaries Dem
Imptementatio
Product
Field Activitie
Great Lakes ££
Irnplemontatio
Products
Field Activities
Surface ££o
Waters Implementation
Products
Field Activities
Wetlands npito
Demo
Implementation
Products
Field Activities
Forest D2S
Health Implementation
Monitoring """^~
Field Activities
Arid Dr
Implementation
Products
Field Activities
Agroecosystems D™°01
Implementation
Products
Field Activities
Landscapes p»°t
Demo
Implementation
Products
4
1,2,3,4,6
AVA'91ProvStat.Sum
A LA '91 Prov Slat. Sum
5
5
A Example Statistical
Summary
3
1,2
A 1991 NE Lakes Rept
A 1992 Peer Rev. Memo
5,8
4,6
1,2,3,4,8,9
A 1992 Statistical Sum
A 1 992 SAMAB Report
A 1991 GA&SEDemo
6,8,9
'
A Statistical Summary
A Research Plan
1,4
4,6
I-?.?
A Statistical Summary
A& Assessment
5
A Example
Assessment
7,10
3
1,2
A Indicator Report
A 1992 Lakes Stat Sum
4
4,5,6,7,8
A Statistical Summary
5,8,9,10
1,2,3,4,8,9
1,2,3,4
A 1993 Stat Sum
A 1 992 SE Demo Final
A 1992 SAMAB Rept
,8,9
A Example Statistical
Summary
,4,7
A Statistical Summary
A& Assessment
A Journal:
Landscape Values
A Report: Landscape
Monitoring Design
1,4,
1A3A?
A Statistical Summar
A & Assessment
5
5
A Statistical Summary
A & Assessment
4,5,6,7,8,9
7,8,10
.1,2,3
A Statistical Summary
1,2,3,4
4,5,6,7,8
A Statistical Summary
5,10
1,2,3,4,8,9
1,2,3,4,8,9
A Statistical Summary
A & Assessment
9
6,8,9
A Statistical Summary
,9
A Statistical Summary
A & Assessment
A Journal:
Conceptual
Models
9,10
.1,2-3,4.6.
A Statistical Summar
A & Assessment
2,3,5
5
5
A Statistical Summar
7,9
4,5,6,7,8,9
1,2,3,7,8,10
A Statistical Summary
A & Assessment
1,2,3,4,8,10
4,5,6,7,8
A Statistical Summary
6,7
5,8,9,10
1,2,3,4,8,9
A Statistical Summary
A & Assessment
9
6,8,9
A Statistical Summary
6,9
A Statistical Summary
A & Assessment
A Journal:
Landscape Scales
A Journal: AVHRR &
Scales
9,10
1.!2.!3,4;5,6,7,8,9,10
A Statistical Summary
A & Assessment
2,3,5
5
A Statistical Summary
7,9
.Ii2..3..4!5!6,7,8,9,10
A Statistical Summary
1,2,3,4,8,10
4,5,6,7,8
A Statistical Summary
6,7
1,2,3,4,5,8,9,10
A Statistical Summary
A & Assessment
9
6,8,9
A Statistical Summary
,8,10
,4
A Statistical Summary
A & Assessment
A Journal: Landscape
Indicators
A Report: Landscape
Status
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Regions
90
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Appendix B:
Integration and Assessment Groups
FY93 • 97 Implementation Schedule
Integration and Current Year!! pyg4 FY95 FY96 FY97 1
Assessment Group FY93 !' . • ! .' I
Planning
and
Peer Review
Landscape Guidance
Characterization and
Assistance
Research
and
Development
Planning and
Peer Review
Guidance
Design and and
Statistics Assistance
Research
and
Development
Planning and
Peer Review
Guidance
Development Assignee
Research
and
Development
Planning
and
Peer Review
Guidance and
Information u Assistance
Management
Research
and
Development
Planning
and
Assessment and Guidance
Reporting and
Assistance
Research
and
Development
• LC Research Plan 1.0 •Peer Review of LC Plan/Program
• Strategic Plan •LC Plan 2.0
• CIS Geographic Reference Database Development Plan
AGfS Interface; Style Guide; User's Guide
A Cpmplete'Digitizing of Midwest Prairie Potholes
A Proposed Classification Categories
I ALand Cover Classification System
1 A Evaluation Reports for Resource Sair
• Report 01
• Journ<
II In"
pling Pilots
l Chesapeake Bay Watershed Pilot Study |
il Article on "EMAP's Geographic Reference Database"
Jim Report (with Design and Statistics) on Extent Estimation Methods Survey
• Evaluation: LC Measurements vs. Indicators
0 Establish Advisory Committee 1
A Status Estimation Procedures and Algorithms
A Procedures for Integrating External Data
A Statistical Graphics Guidance for EMAP Repo
A Trend Detection Power Analysis Procedur
A Approaches for Resource Extent Es
1 A Framework for Estima
rts A Approaches 1
es A Frame De
timation
tion of Ecological Extent
A International £
Environmenta
o Regional Trend Detection
relopment and Evaluation
H Interim Keport (with Landscape Characterization) on Extent Estimation Methods Survey
• Journal Article: "EMAP Sampling Design"
H Working Paper on "Global Grid Enhancements"
• Revised Indicator Strategy 1 1
— - r
A Synopsis of Values,
H
Questions, and Indicators by
A Cross-Cutting Questio
A Cross-Cutting Qu
H Use of Conceptual Mod
• EPA/IRM Review
• SAB Review of Plan
• Information Management Plan
• Report on Information Ma
1 A Proof-of-Concept User
• High-L
• Pilot!
evel Architecture
• information Managemer
•Summary Report on
p EMAP-IM 1.0
Resource Group 1
•is and Indicators for Terrestrial Groups
stions and Indicators for Aquatic Groups
A Model Development Case Studies
A Nominal/Subnominal Standards and Procedui
JA Refined Indicator Test
A Integrated Endpoi
'Is in Indicator Development • SW Framew
• Agro Framework
• SW Endpoints-Indicators •NCE
• EMAP Informa
.0
nagement Enterprise Model
Documentation
ion Management Plan 2.0
1
1
1
t Requirements
IM Proof-of-Concept Study
• Pilots • EMAP-IM 2.0 • Pilots • RN
• Review of Draft Integration & Assessment Plan _ • Integration ar
• Integration and Assessment Plan, version 1 .0
A Spatial Models
A Data Integra
A Assessm
H Regional Assessment Prototype
• Framework for Assessment
tion
ent Questions
A Guidance for Meth
A Societal Vali
A Non-Mo
• Pilot/Dem
•
Symposium on
(Resource Monitoring
• Model-Based
Estimation for
Resource Surveys
JS
ng
it-Indicator Guidance
ork NC Model •
Framework
idpolnts-Indicators
AP-IM 3.0
| Pilots •
1 EMAP-IM 4.0
Assessment Plan, version
Is
es to Questions
netary Benefits
o Integrated Assessment
2.0
91
-------
Appendix C
Cooperating Federal Agencies and Programs
Appendix C. Cooperating Federal Agencies and Programs
U.S. Government
Department
Agency or
Program
Acronym EMAP Components)
US Department of
Agriculture
Agricultural USDA-
Research Service ARS
Agroecosystems
US Department of
Agriculture
National
Agricultural
Statistical Service
USDA- Agroecosystems
MASS
US Department of
Agriculture
US Department of
Agriculture
Forest Service USDA-FS Forests (USDA/FS has the adminstrative and
technical lead for EMAP-Forests)
Arid Ecosystems
. Landscape Characterization
Soil Conservation USDA-
Service SCS
Agroecosystems
Arid Ecosystems
Forests (USDA/FS has the adminstrative and
technical lead for EMAP-Forests)
Landscape Characterization
US Department of
Commerce
National Oceanic
and Atmospheric
Administration
NOAA Estuaries (NOAA has participated in design and
will implement monitoring in Carolinian
Province)
Landscapes
Landscape Characterization
Great Lakes
Wetlands
US Department of
Defense
US Department of
Interior
US Army Corps of
Engineers
Bureau of Land
Management
USACoE
BLM
Landscape Characterization
Arid Ecosystems
to EMAP-Forests)
Indicators
US Department of
Interior
Fish and Wildlife
Service:
National Wetlands
Inventory
USDOI/
FWS/
NWI
Wetlands
Forests
Landscape Characterization
Estuaries
US Department of
Interior
Fish and Wildlife
Service:
National
Contaminants
Program
USDOI/
FWS
Surface Waters
92
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
US Department of
Interior
Geological Survey: USGS Surface Waters
Water Resources
Division
US Department of
Interior
US Department of
Interior
Geological Survey:
National Mapping
Division
National Park
Service
uses/
NMD
USDOI/
NFS
Landscape Characterization
Landscapes
Forests
Arid Ecosystems
US Department of Idaho National
Energy Engineering
Laboratory
DOE Design and Statistics
Indicators
Terrestrial Systems (Forests, Agroecosystems-
and Arid Ecosystems)
US Department of
Energy
Oak Ridge
National
Laboratory
DOE/
ORNL
Design and Statistics
Indicators
Landscapes
US Department of
Energy
Pacific Northwest
Laboratory
DOE/PNL Information Management
Design and Statistics
National
Aeronautics and
Space
Administration
NASA Landscape Characterization
Landscapes
US Food and Drug
Administration
FDA
Estuaries
Tennessee Valley
Authority
TVA
Forests
Landscapes
93
-------
Appendix D
Cooperating State and Local Agencies
Appendix D. Cooperating State and Local Agencies
State or Local
Agency
EMAP
Component Description of Activity
Alabama
Department of
Environmental
Management
Mobile Bay Estuary EMAP-Estuaries
EMAP-Estuaries Agency participates in field monitoring
Louisianian
Province
Provided special summary of data results from
Louisianian Province monitoring
California Design and
Statistics
R-EMAP
Southern California EMAP-Estuaries
Bight
San Francisco Bay EMAP-Estuaries
State tested and subsequently adopted EMAP
sampling design for surveys offish and
amphibians — now being applied to ecological
monitoring in general
California Fish and Game Agency and the
Regional Water Quality Control Board are
cooperating in a special assessment with
Region IX of aquatic and riparian systems in
the Central Valley
Using EMAP-E monitoring design to extend
usefulness of current outfall monitoring
Joint EMAP-E/San Francisco Bay NEP toxics
monitoring pilot project planned for wetlands
in FY94
Chesapeake Bay
Program
(involves Virginia,
Maryland,
Pennsylvania,
New York, West
Virginia, and
Delaware
Estuaries
Landscape
Characterization
Landscapes
CBP using EMAP data to supplement existing
monitoring
Jointly monitoring dissolved oxygen with EMAP
Several joint assessment and special study
activities
Provided land use/ land cover for 69,000 mi2
Chesapeake watershed
Study of associations between land use/ land
cover patterns and environmental quality
Colorado
Forests
Arid Ecosystems
State cooperated with both groups in joint
indicator development project for riverine
woodlands in arid ecosystems
Connecticut
Estuaries
Forests
Surface Waters
Supported monitoring in Long Island Sound and
riverine estuaries
Participating in Forest Health Monitoring field
studies
State participated in lakes pilot and
demonstration monitoring
94
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Delaware
Estuaries
Design & Statistics
Indicator
Developnment
Landscape
Characterization
Participating in monitoring
State applying EMAP approaches to meet 305(b)
(States Rivers Report) reporting requirements
Agreement to share CIS information
Delaware Estuaries
Program
(involves Delaware,
New Jersey,
New York,
Pennsylvania)
Estuaries
Using EMAP design to organize long term
environmental monitoring
EMAP provided a special fact sheet and data
summary of monitoring results in Delaware
estuary
Florida
Estuaries
Indian River Estuaries
National Estuaries
Program (NEP)
Gulf of Mexico
Program
(involves Florida,
Alabama,
Mississippi,
Louisiana, and
Texas)
Estuaries
Participating in Louisianian Province
monitoring;
EMAP-E preparing special fact sheets and data
summaries for monitoring conducted in state
waters
Technical assistance in monitoring design and
information about EMAP methods
Sarasota Bay NEP Estuaries
Tampa Bay NEP Estuaries
Georgia Forests
Great Lakes Estuaries
National Program
Office (GLNPO)
(involves
Wisconsin,
Minnesota,
Michigan, Indiana,
Ohio,
Pennsylvania, and
New York)
Technical assistance in monitoring design and
information about EMAP methods
Used EMAP design to organize Tampa Bay
long-term environmental monitoring
Participated in ioblolly/shortleaf pine forest
indicator development
Design of Regional-EMAP Project
Lake Sampling methods for Lake Michigan
Providing data for basic environmental
background for GoMP
Direct interaction with states of Alabama, Texas,
and Florida
Advice on general monitoring and assessment
design
Fact sheets and monitoring summaries provided
on a state-by-state basis
Illinois
Landscape
Characterization
State funding EMAP for statewide land use/land
cover characterization '"
95
-------
Appendix D
Cooperating State and Local Agencies
Long Island Sound Estuaries
Estuary Program
(involves
Connecticut,
Rhode Island, and
New York)
Virginian Province results provided in fact
sheets and summaries for Long Island Sound
Shared data on dissolved oxygen and other
contamination in the Sound
Pilot joint monitoring project
Design of new dissolved oxygen monitoring
Maine
Maine:
Casco Bay
Program
Surface Waters Supported the Lakes Pilot and Demonstration
monitoring projects
Estuaries Cooperation on the design and field and lab
methods employed for monitoring
Maryland
Forests
Participating in field studies for Forest Health
Monitoring
Maryland-
Delaware Inland
Bays
Estuaries
Adapting EMAP design and field methods to
monitoring requirements
Massachusetts
Forests
Surface Waters
Participating in Forest Health Monitoring field
studies
Supported the Lakes Pilot and Demonstration
monitoring projects
The Navajo Nation Arid Ecosystems
Participating in the planning and field studies
for the demonstration monitoring of the
Colorado Plateau
Nebraska
Agro ecosystems
Supported 1993 Pilot and indicator
development
New Hampshire Forests
Surface Waters
Participating in Forest Health Monitoring field
studies
Supported the Lakes Pilot and monitored project
logistics
New Jersey
Estuaries
Surface Waters
Landscape
Characterization
Supported monitoring in Virginian Province and
riverine estuaries
Supported the Northeast Lakes Pilot and
demonstration monitoring projects
Agreement to share CIS information
New Jersey-New
York Harbors
Estuary Program
Estuaries
Used densified EMAP sampling grid for
monitoring design
New Mexico
Landscape
Characterization
State funding EMAP to provide statewide land
use/land cover characterization
New York
Surface Waters
Provided planning, field monitoring and
analysis support to Lakes pilot project
North Carolina
Agro ecosystems
Forests
Supported 1992 pilot project
Participated in loblolly/shortleaf pine forest
indicator development
96
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
Ohio
Surface Waters
Provided EMAP with state monitoring data to
test indicators
Oregon
R-EMAP
The State Department of Environmental
Chemistry will work with Region X in a
biological assessment of wadeable streams in
the Coast Range -
Pennsylvania
Landscape
Characterization
State funding EMAP to complete statewide land
use/land cover characterization
Rhode Island
Estuaries
Forests
Surface Waters
Participated in monitoring
Participating in Forest Health Monitoring field
studies
Participated in monitoring
Southern Forests
Appalachian Man , ,
and the Biosphere Landscapes
Reserve
(involves Alabama,
Tennessee,
Kentucky, North
Carolina, South
Carolina)
Participated in forest indicator development
Developing joint assessment approach
South Carolina
Forests
Participated in loblolly/shortleaf pine forest
indicator development
Texas
R-EMAP
The State Water Commission is actively
cooperating with EPA Region VI in a study of
toxic contamination of selected estuaries
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
Surface Waters
Estuaries
Forests
R-EMAP
Planning, field monitoring and logistics support
to Northeast Lakes Demonstration
Participating in Virginia Province monitoring
Participated in loblolly/shortleaf pine forest
indicator development
The State Department of Ecology will work with
Region X in a biological assessment of
wadeable streams in the Coast Range and the
Yakima River Basin
Wisconsin
Surface Waters
The state is a pilot site for the development of a
model of coordinated surface water
monitoring, under the auspices of the
Interagency Task Force on Water Quality
Monitoring
Association of State Surface Waters
and Interstate
Water Pollution
Control
Administrators
Working cooperatively with the ASIWPCA's
state water monitoring task force
97
-------
Appendix D
Cooperating State and Local Agencies
National
Association of
State Departments
of Agriculture
Agro ecosystems
Recruits enumerators for USDA-NASS-
conducted field monitoring
National
Association of
State Foresters
Forests
Association assumes lead in presenting Forest
Health Monitoring program to State Foresters
— Third partner with USDA-Forest Service and
EMAP
National Governors
Association
Serves as lead for ORD technology transfer
issues
98
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September ] 993
Appendix E.
Cooperating Universities and
Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)
University or EMAP
NGO Component Project
Bowling Green
University
Dartmouth College
Desert Research
Institute of the
University of
Nevada
Duke University
Estuarine Research
Federation
Grand Canyon
National Trust
International
Standards
Organization (ISO)
Louisiana State
University
North Carolina
State University
International
Activities
Surface Waters
Landscapes
Estuaries
Estuaries
Arid Ecosystems
Information
Management
Wetlands
Landscapes
Agroecosystems
Technical assistance to Baltic nations
Northeast Lakes demonstration
Development of a landscape monitoring
paradigm
Carolinian Province monitoring planning
Peer review of plans and implementation
Conceptual approach for integrating CIS with
environmental indicators to assess
desertification
EMAP information systems architecture
Estuarine emergents (salt marsh) pilot project
Development of a landscape monitoring
paradigm
Overall design of EMAP-Agoecosystems
Oregon State
University
Arctic
Contaminants
Research Project
Design and
Statistics
Landscapes
Pilot study of organic and inorganic
contaminants in the U.S. Arctic
Investigations in statistical and sampling issues
Relationship of species richness to landscape
scales and attributes in the United States
Society for Range
Management
Arid Lands
Workgroup on nominal/subnominal ecological
condition related to desertification
South Dakota State
University
Arid Lands
Workgroup on nominal/subnominal ecological
condition related to desertification
State University of
New York (SUNY),
College of
Environmental
Sciences and
Forestry (Syracuse)
Surface Waters
Northeast Lakes demonstration
99
-------
Appendix E
Cooperating Universities and Non-Governmental Organizations
Texas A&M
University
Arctic
Contaminants
Research Program
Estuaries
R-EMAP Project
for Region VI
Indicators of organic contaminants in the Arctic
environment
Louisianian Province monitoring and
assessment planning
Characterization of toxics in selected Texas
estuaries
The Nature
Conservancy
Towson State
University
United Nations
Environment
Programme-Global
Environmental
Monitoring System
United Nations
Environmental
Programme
University of
Arizona
Landscapes
Landscape
Characterization
International
Activities
Design and
Statistics
Arid Ecosystems
Relationship of species richness to landscape
scales and attributes in the United States
Chesapeake Bay watershed landscape
characterization
Technical assistance to Earthwatch
Global monitoring designs
Workgroup on nominal/subnominal ecological
condition related to desertification
Indicator plot design pilot study
University of
California-Santa
Barbara
Landscape
Characterization
Development of a geographic reference
database
University of
Georgia
University of Maine
University of
Michigan
University of
Mississippi
University of North
Carolina
University of
Ottawa
University of Rhode
Island
Landscapes
Estuaries
Indicators
Landscapes
Surface Waters
Great Lakes
Estuaries
Estuaries
Landscapes
Estuaries
Relationship of species richness to landscape
scales and attributes in the United States
Carolinian Province monitoring planning
Cross resource development of wildlife
indicators
Relationship of species richness to landscape
scales and attributes in the United States
Northeast Lakes demonstration
Diatoms as indicators of biotic integrity and
trophic status
Louisianian Province monitoring and
assessment planning
Carolinian Province monitoring planning
Development of a landscape monitoring
paradigm
Management of program operations
100
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
University of South Estuaries
Carolina
Carolinian Province monitoring planning
University of
Tennessee
Forests
Southern Appalachian Man And the Biosphere
demonstration project
Utah State
University
Wetlands
Estuarine emergents (salt marsh) pilot project
101
-------
Index
Index
academic institutions 7
acid deposition 86
aesthetics 15
agriculture 80
agroecosystem 10
air quality 86
alternative geometric models 53
American National Standards Institute 63
American Statistical Association 7
analytical methods 85
annual statistical summaries 51, 58
Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program (AMAP) 84
arctic programs 84
arid ecosystems 15
assessment 57
assessment framework 46
assessment science 47
atmospheric stressors 86
AVHRR16,31,34
Baltic 81
benthic communities 29
benthic infauna 20,21
biodiversity 10,26, 34
biological integrity 36, 39
biotic integrity 28
breeding bird 34
Canada 28, 87
Environment Canada
National Water Research Laboratory 29
Forestry Canada 49
Ontario 28
Royal Society of Canada 49
Cape Hatteras 22
Carolinian Province 18,22
case studies 87
Central Appalachian Ridge and Valley 78
Chesapeake Bay 6,20
Chesapeake Bay Program 20
Chesapeake Bay Watershed 68
chlorophyll 30
classification system. 66
climate indicators 86
Colorado Plateau 15,16,17
conceptual model 13
conceptual models 57
configuration management 70
crops
annual 10
perennial 10
cumulative distribution functions (CDFs) 51
data quality objectives (DQO) 70
Delaware Bay 20
density estimation 55
desertification 16,17
Desertification Susceptibility Index 15
design 81
detection monitoring 24, 25
diatom 28
diversity 15
Eastern Europe 81
ecological economics 48
ecological indicators 47
ecological risk 2
ecological status 1, 64
ecoregions 38
ecosystem health 48
ecosystem health and human medicine 48
environmental assessment reports 58
environmental ethics 48
environmental stresses 36
estuaries 6,18
Estuarine Research Federation (ERF) 7,19
Europe 87
evapotranspiration 15
exotic species 36
extent estimation 50, 68
field sampling 20, 21
fish 28, 38, 80
assemblages 39
pathology 20, 21
population 22
tissue 77
fishability28, 36
fisheries 36, 79
flood attenuation 40
Framework for Ecological Risk Assessment 87
Geochemical and Environmental Research Group
(GERG) 79
geographic information systems (CIS) 16, 61, 69
CIS interface 65
Geographic Positioning Systems (GPS) 73
geographic reference database (GRD) 64, 65
geometric model 53
geostatistical tools 55
global monitoring designs 53
global warming. 84
Grand Canyon Trust 16
Great Lakes 6, 28
ground survey information 54
Gulf of Mexico 6, 21
habitat 36, 40
Hudson River Foundation 78
hydrologic modifications 36
Indian River Lagoon 22
indicators 12, 20, 25, 36, 81
indicator development 22, 56
Indicator Development Strategy 56
indicators of trophic status 29
insects 13
research 17
102
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
information management 58
information management architecture 60
interagency relationships 6
international activities 81
International Society for Ecological Economics 49
International Standards Organization 63
juvenile fish surveys 22
Lake Michigan 30
Lake Superior 30
lake trout 29
lakes 36
land cover 31
land cover generation 66
land-cover classification system 64, 66
land-cover data 64
land use and land cover 22
Landsat 66
landscape ecology 31
landscape monitoring approach 32
lichens 85
literature review 39.
ioblolly-shortleaf pine forests 25
logistics 73
Long Island Sound 20
Louisianian Province 18, 21
macrobenthos 38
macroinvertebrate 28, 38, 80
macroinvertebrate diversity 41
map projection 53
marine systems 84
Maryland International Institute for Ecological
Economics 49
mesophytic 26
metadata 71
methods 71
Mexico 87
Mid-Atlantic Highlands 38
monitoring methods 71
multi-stage estimation 54
National Association of State Foresters 24
natural resource surveys 54
Navajo Nation 16
nearshore sampling 29
nematode 13
net primary productivity (NPP) 15
non-point source pollution 22
North American Landscape Classification Consortium
(NALC) 33
nutrient control 28
objectives 2
organic contaminants 85
ozone 86
pasture 10
peer review 7,13
periphyton 38
ponds 10
Prairie Potholes Region 42, 69
probability-based sampling 53
productivity 10,15, 40
proof-of-concept 58
quality of air, water, and soil 10
radioactive materials 84
regional ecosystem assessment prototype (REAP) 48
remote sensing 54
reporting guidelines 47
research issues 30
resource economics 47
resource extent estimation 54
sampling design 50
sampling frame 64, 67
sediment 20, 21, 79
sediment toxicity 20, 21
sediment trap samples 28
shellfish 22
social values 47, 57
Society for Range Management 16,17
south Florida 6
spatial
information 64
spatial variability 29, 85
species richness 34
state and local governments 87
State Government Agencies and Programs
Alabama 21,25, 26, 40
Alaska 84
Arizona 17
California 25, 80
California Fish and Game Agency 80
Colorado 1 7, 25
Connecticut 20, 25, 36
Delaware 20, 25
Florida 21,22,40
Georgia 22, 25, 26, 69
Illinois 29, 30, 67
Indiana 29
Iowa 79
Kansas 79
Department of Wildlife and Parks 79
Ilinois29
Indiana 30
Louisiana 21, 40
Maine 25, 36, 77
Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) 77
Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife 77
Health and Environmental Testing Laboratory 77
Maryland 20, 25, 38, 78
Massachusetts 20, 25, 36
Michigan 29, 30
Minnesota 30, 42
Mississippi 21,40
Missouri 79
Department of Natural Resources 79
Nebraska 12, 79
Department of Environmental Quality 79.
New Hampshire 25, 36
New Jersey 20, 25, 36, 77
103
-------
Index
New Mexico 17, 67
New York 20, 36, 77
North Carolina 11, 22, 25, 26, 69
North Dakota 42
Oregon 80
Department of Environmental Chemistry 80
Pennsylvania 20, 38, 67, 78
Rhode Island 20, 25, 36
South Carolina 22, 25, 26
Marine Resources Division, 23
South Dakota 42
state forestry agencies 24, 25,.26
state soil conservation service offices 26
Tennessee 26
Texas 21,40, 79
Gulf Coast Research Laboratory 79
Utah 16,17
Vermont 25, 36
Virginia 20,25, 26, 38, 78
Washington 80
Department of Ecology 80
West Virginia 38, 78
Wisconsin 29, 30, 39
statistical framework 50
statistical research 51
status estimation 51
streams 36, 38
stressors 57
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) 22
surface water extent 36
surface waters 36
survey sampling design 50
sustainability 10, 36, 40
systems engineering 61
taxonomic coding system 72
technical assistance 83
temporal variability 29
Thematic Mapper™ 41, 66, 68
tidal salt marshes 22
tidal wetlands 22
toxic pollutants 28, 79
trend estimation 50
trophic condition 28, 30, 36
U.S. Government Agencies and Programs
Department of Agriculture
Agricultural Research Service (USDA-ARS) 10
Forest Service (USDA-FS) 6,16, 24, 25, 26, 35
National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA-
NASS)10,11
Soil Conservation Service (USDA-SCS) 10,12,16,
24,26
Department of Commerce
National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST) 63
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) 6,19,22,29,41,77
National Marine Fishery Service
Gulf Coast Regional Laboratory 21
Regional Laboratories 23
National Status and Trends (NS&T) Program 21,
22
National Weather Service 86
. Strategic Assessment Branch 18
Coastwatch-Change Analysis Program 67
Department of Defense 87
Army Corps of Engineers 67
Department of Energy 87
Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) 33, 34, 35,
64
Department of Interior 87
Bureau of Land Management 16, 24
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) 16,19, 24, 29, 35,
36, 39, 43
National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) 40, 41, 69
Gap Analysis Program (GAP) 64, 66
National Park Service 16, 24
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 39, 64, 65
EROS Data Center 35, 67
National Mapping Division (NMD) 65, 66
National Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA)
67
EPA Programs and Regions
Arctic Contaminants Research Program 4
Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNET) 86
Intergovernmental Task Force on Water Quality
Monitoring 39
National Stream Survey 78
OARM 65
Office of Information Resources Management
(OIRM)61,63,73
Geographic Information Systems Group 63
Information Management Data Administration
Group 63
National Data Processing Division 63, 65
National Data Processing Division (NDPD)
61,63,65
Office of Water 39, 63
Chesapeake Bay Program Office (CBPO) 18, 20,
68
Gulf of Mexico Program 21
Maryland/Delaware Inland Bays Program 20
New York/New Jersey Harbor Estuary Program.
20,77
Office of Policy and Program Evaluation (OPPE)
Center for Environmental Statistics 63
Office of Research and Development (ORD) 71
Ecological Risk Assessment Program 2, 7, 87
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
Program (EMAP) 1
EMAP-Agroecosystems 10, 26, 69
EMAP-Arid Ecosystems (EMAP-Arid) 7. 15
EMAP-Assessment and Reporting (EMAP-A&R)
13,46
EMAP-Design and Statistics (EMAP-D&S) 50,
64,65
EMAP-Estuaries 18, 59
104
-------
EMAP Project Descriptions
September 1993
EMAP-Forest Health Monitoring (EMAP-FHM)
13, 24, 47, 59, 69, 70
EMAP-Great Lakes 28
EMAP-lndicators13,46, 56
EMAP-lnformation Management (EMAP-IM)
58,64,65,70,72
EMAP-International 81
EMAP-Landscape Characterization (EMAP-LC)
13, 26, 64
EMAP-Landscapes 13, 31
EMAP-Logistics 73
EMAP-Methods 71
EMAP-Quality Assurance (EMAP-QA) 70
EMAP-Surface Waters (EMAP-SW) 13, 26, 36,
47
EMAP-Wetlands 40, 69
Regional-EMAP (R-EMAP) 4, 6, 13, 20, 52, 69,
76
Global Climate Change 6
Habitat/Biodiversity 6, 34
Office of Environmental Processes and Effects
Research (OEPER) 84
Arctic Contaminants Research Program
(ACRP) 84
Risk Assessment Forum 7, 46, 87
Region
I 20, 25, 36, 52, 77
II 20, 36, 52, 77
III 13, 14, 20, 25, 26, 38, 52, 67, 68, 78
Mid-Atlantic Highland Assessment (MAHA) 38
IV 11, 21, 22, 25, 26, 40
IX 25, 52, 80
V 28, 39, 42
VI 21,40, 52, 67, 79
VII 12,42,52,79
VIII 15, 25,42
X52, 80
regional offices 69
Risk Assessment Forum 4
Science Advisory Board (SAB) 1, 7, 46, 47, 87
The Ecological Effects Committee 7
Federal Emergency Management Agency 67
Global Change Research Program 64
National Academy of Science's
National Research Council 7
National Aeronautical and Space Administration
(NASA) 53, 64
North American Landscape Classification Consortium
(NALC) 67
Smithsonian Institution 38
Southern Appalachian Man and the Biosphere
(SAMAB) 24, 26
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) 24, 26, 33, 34
United Kingdom
Laboratory of Ecotoxicology, London 49
National Institute of Public Health and Environmental
Protection 49
United Nations 81
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) 54,
82
Earthwatch 82
Global Environmental Monitoring System (GEMS)
82
UNESCO 26 •
Man and the Biosphere (MAB) 26
World Meteorological Organization 87
Universities
Bowling Green University 83
City University of New York
Queens College 37
Dartmouth College 36
Duke University 23
Louisiana State University 42
North Carolina State University (NCSU) 10,13
North Dakota State University 43
Oregan State University (OSU) 7, 35, 38, 52, 54, 85
Pennsylvania State University 54, 68
State University of New York
College of Environmental Sciences and Forestry-
Syracuse 36, 54
Texas A&M University 21, 79, 85
Towson State University 68
University of Arizona 16, 33
University of California -Santa Barbara - 33, 66
University of Florida 42
University of Georgia 23
University of Maine 36, 39
University of Michigan 29
University of Mississippi. 21
University of Nevada 37, 39
Desert Research Institute 7,16, 33, 49
University of New Mexico 33
University of North Carolina 23
University of Ottawa 33, 34
University of Rhode Island 19
University of South Carolina 23
University of Tennessee 27
University of Texas at Austin 54
University of Washington 54
Utah State University 42
university involvement 8
user requirements 59
values 40
variance estimation 55
video 51
Virginian Province 18, 20
visual assessment matrix 48
visualization 47
walleye 29
water quality 40
wetlands 6, 40
estuarine emergent 40
palustrine emergent 40, 42
palustrine forested 40
windbreaks 13
105
-------
For Additional Information
To be put on the distribution list for EMAP's Monitor, a newsletter, send
your name, affiliation and mailing address to:
EMAP Monitor
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (G-72)
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
For more information on EMAP databases or information systems,
contact:
EMAP-lnformation Management
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (RD-680)
401 M Street Southwest
Washington, DC 20460
202/260-3255
FAX: 202/260-4346
For more information on EMAP Assessments and reports, contact:
EMAP-Assessment and Reporting
EMAP Research and Assessment Center (MD-75)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
919/541-0673
To order EPA brochures, posters, magazines and non-technical reports:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (PM-211B)
Information Access Branch
401 M Street Southwest
Washington, DC 20460
202/260-7751
FAX: 202/260-6257
(Have the EPA Number or title and subject ready when ordering.)
To order EPA technical reports, including software and videos:
National Technical Information Service (NTIS)
U.S. Department of Commerce
Springfield, VA 22161
NTIS Quikservice 703/487-4650 and ask for
PR-846/827
Orders: 800/553-NTIS
* U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE:1993-750-002/80290
106
------- |