Name: Probability of Occurrence with 6 Degree increase
Display Field: Source
Type: Feature Layer
Geometry Type: esriGeometryPolygon
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>This dataset is one of a suite of products from the Nature’s Network project (</SPAN><A href="http://naturesnetwork.org"><SPAN>naturesnetwork.org</SPAN></A><SPAN>). Nature’s Network is a collaborative effort to identify shared priorities for conservation in the Northeast, considering the value of fish and wildlife species and the natural areas they inhabit. Brook Trout probability of occurrence is intended to provide predictions of occupancy (probability of presence) for catchments smaller than 200 km2 in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic region from Virginia to Maine. The dataset provides predictions under current environmental conditions and for future increases in stream temperature. Brook Trout probability of occurrence (under current climate) is one input used in developing “Lotic Core Areas, Stratified by Watershed, Northeast U.S.” that is also part of Nature’s Network. Lotic core areas represent intact, well-connected rivers and stream reaches in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic region that, if protected as part of stream networks and watersheds, will continue to support a broad diversity of aquatic species and the ecosystems on which they depend. The combination of lotic core areas, lentic (lake and pond) core areas, and aquatic buffers constitute the “aquatic core networks” of Nature’s Network. These and other datasets that augment or complement aquatic core networks are available in the Nature’s Network gallery: </SPAN><A href="https://nalcc.databasin.org/galleries/8f4dfe780c444634a45ee4acc930a055"><SPAN>https://nalcc.databasin.org/galleries/8f4dfe780c444634a45ee4acc930a055.</SPAN></A></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Intended Uses</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>In the context of Nature’s Network, this dataset is primarily intended to be used in conjunction with the product “Lotic Core Areas, Stratified by Watershed, Northeast U.S.” to better understand the importance of core areas to Brook Trout. It also can be used on its own to identify priority watersheds for Brook Trout. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>The dataset was originally developed for and is part of the Interactive Catchment Explorer (ICE). ICE (</SPAN><A href="http://ice.ecosheds.org/)"><SPAN>http://ice.ecosheds.org/) </SPAN></A><SPAN>is a dynamic visualization interface for exploring catchment characteristics and environmental model predictions. ICE was created for resource managers and researchers to explore complex, multivariate environmental datasets and model results, to identify spatial patterns related to ecological conditions, and to prioritize locations for restoration or further study. ICE is part of the Spatial Hydro-Ecological Decision System (SHEDS).</SPAN></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Description and Derivation</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>The dataset provides predictions under current environmental conditions and for future increases in stream temperature of 2, 4, and 6 degrees Celsius. It employs a logistic mixed effects model to include the effects of landscape, land-use, and climate variables on the probability of Brook Trout occupancy in stream reaches (confluence to confluence). It includes random effects of HUC10 (watershed) to allow for the chance that the probability of occupancy and the effect of covariates were likely to be similar within a watershed. The fish data came primarily from state and federal agencies that sample streams for Brook Trout as part of regular monitoring. A stream is considered occupied if any Brook Trout were ever caught during an electrofishing survey between 1991 and 2010. The results are based on more than 15,000 samples from more than 13,000 catchments from all 13 Northeast states.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Factors that had a strong positive effect on Brook Trout occupancy included percent forest cover and summer precipitation. Factors that had a strong negative effect on occupancy included July stream temperature, percent agriculture, drainage area, and percent upstream impounded area.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Estimates of the probability of occupancy for each catchment with increases in stream temperature of either 2,4 or 6 degrees C are also provided. To provide these estimates, the input values for mean July stream temperature were simply increased by 2, 4, or 6 C and estimated occupancies recorded.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>More technical details about the Brook Trout probability of occurrence product are available at: </SPAN><A href="http://conte-ecology.github.io/Northeast_Bkt_Occupancy/"><SPAN>http://conte-ecology.github.io/Northeast_Bkt_Occupancy/. </SPAN></A><SPAN>Technical details about the regional stream temperature model, which is used in predicting Brook Trout occupancy, are available at: </SPAN><A href="http://conte-ecology.github.io/conteStreamTemperature_northeast/"><SPAN>http://conte-ecology.github.io/conteStreamTemperature_northeast/.</SPAN></A></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Known Issues and Uncertainties</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>As with any project carried out across such a large area, this dataset is subject to limitations. The results by themselves are not a prescription for on-the-ground action; users are encouraged to verify, with field visits and site-specific knowledge, the value of any areas identified in the project. Known issues and uncertainties include the following:</SPAN></P><UL><LI><P><SPAN>Users are cautioned against using the data on too small an area (for example, a small segment of stream), as the data may not be sufficiently accurate at that level of resolution.</SPAN></P></LI><LI><P><SPAN>Uncertainties in predictions of stream temperature also result in uncertainties in Brook Trout occupancy estimates. Local effects of groundwater (which may provide cold-water refugia for Brook Trout) cannot be well accounted for in regional stream temperature models at this time. Catchments near waterbodies with water control structures such as dams may also have unreliable temperature predictions because the temperature model does not include information on release schedules or strategies.</SPAN></P></LI><LI><P><SPAN>Catchments with any Brook Trout occurrences reported in the past 30 years have been presumed to be occupied for purposes of the model. If local extirpations have occurred, this could lead to overprediction of the probability of Brook Trout occupancy.</SPAN></P></LI><LI><P><SPAN>Projections of effects of future temperature changes to Brook Trout occupancy are intended to convey a sense of the resilience of the species to changing temperatures. In reality, stream temperatures will not change at the same rate or uniformly, as some streams are more buffered against changing air temperatures than others.</SPAN></P></LI><LI><P><SPAN>As with any regional GIS data, errors in mapping and alignment of hydrography, development, agriculture, and a number of other data layers can affect the model results.</SPAN></P></LI></UL><P><SPAN /></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Service Item Id: fd0b1918c2ec49dc9cb900efeda5207b
Copyright Text: Daniel Hocking and Ben Letcher, USGS Silvio O. Conte Anadromous Fish Research Center
Name: Probability of Occurrence with 4 Degree increase
Display Field: Source
Type: Feature Layer
Geometry Type: esriGeometryPolygon
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>This dataset is one of a suite of products from the Nature’s Network project (</SPAN><A href="http://naturesnetwork.org"><SPAN>naturesnetwork.org</SPAN></A><SPAN>). Nature’s Network is a collaborative effort to identify shared priorities for conservation in the Northeast, considering the value of fish and wildlife species and the natural areas they inhabit. Brook Trout probability of occurrence is intended to provide predictions of occupancy (probability of presence) for catchments smaller than 200 km2 in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic region from Virginia to Maine. The dataset provides predictions under current environmental conditions and for future increases in stream temperature. Brook Trout probability of occurrence (under current climate) is one input used in developing “Lotic Core Areas, Stratified by Watershed, Northeast U.S.” that is also part of Nature’s Network. Lotic core areas represent intact, well-connected rivers and stream reaches in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic region that, if protected as part of stream networks and watersheds, will continue to support a broad diversity of aquatic species and the ecosystems on which they depend. The combination of lotic core areas, lentic (lake and pond) core areas, and aquatic buffers constitute the “aquatic core networks” of Nature’s Network. These and other datasets that augment or complement aquatic core networks are available in the Nature’s Network gallery: </SPAN><A href="https://nalcc.databasin.org/galleries/8f4dfe780c444634a45ee4acc930a055"><SPAN>https://nalcc.databasin.org/galleries/8f4dfe780c444634a45ee4acc930a055.</SPAN></A></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Intended Uses</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>In the context of Nature’s Network, this dataset is primarily intended to be used in conjunction with the product “Lotic Core Areas, Stratified by Watershed, Northeast U.S.” to better understand the importance of core areas to Brook Trout. It also can be used on its own to identify priority watersheds for Brook Trout. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>The dataset was originally developed for and is part of the Interactive Catchment Explorer (ICE). ICE (</SPAN><A href="http://ice.ecosheds.org/)"><SPAN>http://ice.ecosheds.org/) </SPAN></A><SPAN>is a dynamic visualization interface for exploring catchment characteristics and environmental model predictions. ICE was created for resource managers and researchers to explore complex, multivariate environmental datasets and model results, to identify spatial patterns related to ecological conditions, and to prioritize locations for restoration or further study. ICE is part of the Spatial Hydro-Ecological Decision System (SHEDS).</SPAN></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Description and Derivation</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>The dataset provides predictions under current environmental conditions and for future increases in stream temperature of 2, 4, and 6 degrees Celsius. It employs a logistic mixed effects model to include the effects of landscape, land-use, and climate variables on the probability of Brook Trout occupancy in stream reaches (confluence to confluence). It includes random effects of HUC10 (watershed) to allow for the chance that the probability of occupancy and the effect of covariates were likely to be similar within a watershed. The fish data came primarily from state and federal agencies that sample streams for Brook Trout as part of regular monitoring. A stream is considered occupied if any Brook Trout were ever caught during an electrofishing survey between 1991 and 2010. The results are based on more than 15,000 samples from more than 13,000 catchments from all 13 Northeast states.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Factors that had a strong positive effect on Brook Trout occupancy included percent forest cover and summer precipitation. Factors that had a strong negative effect on occupancy included July stream temperature, percent agriculture, drainage area, and percent upstream impounded area.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Estimates of the probability of occupancy for each catchment with increases in stream temperature of either 2,4 or 6 degrees C are also provided. To provide these estimates, the input values for mean July stream temperature were simply increased by 2, 4, or 6 C and estimated occupancies recorded.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>More technical details about the Brook Trout probability of occurrence product are available at: </SPAN><A href="http://conte-ecology.github.io/Northeast_Bkt_Occupancy/"><SPAN>http://conte-ecology.github.io/Northeast_Bkt_Occupancy/. </SPAN></A><SPAN>Technical details about the regional stream temperature model, which is used in predicting Brook Trout occupancy, are available at: </SPAN><A href="http://conte-ecology.github.io/conteStreamTemperature_northeast/"><SPAN>http://conte-ecology.github.io/conteStreamTemperature_northeast/.</SPAN></A></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Known Issues and Uncertainties</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>As with any project carried out across such a large area, this dataset is subject to limitations. The results by themselves are not a prescription for on-the-ground action; users are encouraged to verify, with field visits and site-specific knowledge, the value of any areas identified in the project. Known issues and uncertainties include the following:</SPAN></P><UL><LI><P><SPAN>Users are cautioned against using the data on too small an area (for example, a small segment of stream), as the data may not be sufficiently accurate at that level of resolution.</SPAN></P></LI><LI><P><SPAN>Uncertainties in predictions of stream temperature also result in uncertainties in Brook Trout occupancy estimates. Local effects of groundwater (which may provide cold-water refugia for Brook Trout) cannot be well accounted for in regional stream temperature models at this time. Catchments near waterbodies with water control structures such as dams may also have unreliable temperature predictions because the temperature model does not include information on release schedules or strategies.</SPAN></P></LI><LI><P><SPAN>Catchments with any Brook Trout occurrences reported in the past 30 years have been presumed to be occupied for purposes of the model. If local extirpations have occurred, this could lead to overprediction of the probability of Brook Trout occupancy.</SPAN></P></LI><LI><P><SPAN>Projections of effects of future temperature changes to Brook Trout occupancy are intended to convey a sense of the resilience of the species to changing temperatures. In reality, stream temperatures will not change at the same rate or uniformly, as some streams are more buffered against changing air temperatures than others.</SPAN></P></LI><LI><P><SPAN>As with any regional GIS data, errors in mapping and alignment of hydrography, development, agriculture, and a number of other data layers can affect the model results.</SPAN></P></LI></UL><P><SPAN /></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Service Item Id: fd0b1918c2ec49dc9cb900efeda5207b
Copyright Text: Daniel Hocking and Ben Letcher, USGS Silvio O. Conte Anadromous Fish Research Center
Name: Probability of Occurrence with 2 Degree increase
Display Field: Source
Type: Feature Layer
Geometry Type: esriGeometryPolygon
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>This dataset is one of a suite of products from the Nature’s Network project (</SPAN><A href="http://naturesnetwork.org"><SPAN>naturesnetwork.org</SPAN></A><SPAN>). Nature’s Network is a collaborative effort to identify shared priorities for conservation in the Northeast, considering the value of fish and wildlife species and the natural areas they inhabit. Brook Trout probability of occurrence is intended to provide predictions of occupancy (probability of presence) for catchments smaller than 200 km2 in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic region from Virginia to Maine. The dataset provides predictions under current environmental conditions and for future increases in stream temperature. Brook Trout probability of occurrence (under current climate) is one input used in developing “Lotic Core Areas, Stratified by Watershed, Northeast U.S.” that is also part of Nature’s Network. Lotic core areas represent intact, well-connected rivers and stream reaches in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic region that, if protected as part of stream networks and watersheds, will continue to support a broad diversity of aquatic species and the ecosystems on which they depend. The combination of lotic core areas, lentic (lake and pond) core areas, and aquatic buffers constitute the “aquatic core networks” of Nature’s Network. These and other datasets that augment or complement aquatic core networks are available in the Nature’s Network gallery: </SPAN><A href="https://nalcc.databasin.org/galleries/8f4dfe780c444634a45ee4acc930a055"><SPAN>https://nalcc.databasin.org/galleries/8f4dfe780c444634a45ee4acc930a055.</SPAN></A></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Intended Uses</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>In the context of Nature’s Network, this dataset is primarily intended to be used in conjunction with the product “Lotic Core Areas, Stratified by Watershed, Northeast U.S.” to better understand the importance of core areas to Brook Trout. It also can be used on its own to identify priority watersheds for Brook Trout. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>The dataset was originally developed for and is part of the Interactive Catchment Explorer (ICE). ICE (</SPAN><A href="http://ice.ecosheds.org/)"><SPAN>http://ice.ecosheds.org/) </SPAN></A><SPAN>is a dynamic visualization interface for exploring catchment characteristics and environmental model predictions. ICE was created for resource managers and researchers to explore complex, multivariate environmental datasets and model results, to identify spatial patterns related to ecological conditions, and to prioritize locations for restoration or further study. ICE is part of the Spatial Hydro-Ecological Decision System (SHEDS).</SPAN></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Description and Derivation</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>The dataset provides predictions under current environmental conditions and for future increases in stream temperature of 2, 4, and 6 degrees Celsius. It employs a logistic mixed effects model to include the effects of landscape, land-use, and climate variables on the probability of Brook Trout occupancy in stream reaches (confluence to confluence). It includes random effects of HUC10 (watershed) to allow for the chance that the probability of occupancy and the effect of covariates were likely to be similar within a watershed. The fish data came primarily from state and federal agencies that sample streams for Brook Trout as part of regular monitoring. A stream is considered occupied if any Brook Trout were ever caught during an electrofishing survey between 1991 and 2010. The results are based on more than 15,000 samples from more than 13,000 catchments from all 13 Northeast states.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Factors that had a strong positive effect on Brook Trout occupancy included percent forest cover and summer precipitation. Factors that had a strong negative effect on occupancy included July stream temperature, percent agriculture, drainage area, and percent upstream impounded area.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Estimates of the probability of occupancy for each catchment with increases in stream temperature of either 2,4 or 6 degrees C are also provided. To provide these estimates, the input values for mean July stream temperature were simply increased by 2, 4, or 6 C and estimated occupancies recorded.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>More technical details about the Brook Trout probability of occurrence product are available at: </SPAN><A href="http://conte-ecology.github.io/Northeast_Bkt_Occupancy/"><SPAN>http://conte-ecology.github.io/Northeast_Bkt_Occupancy/. </SPAN></A><SPAN>Technical details about the regional stream temperature model, which is used in predicting Brook Trout occupancy, are available at: </SPAN><A href="http://conte-ecology.github.io/conteStreamTemperature_northeast/"><SPAN>http://conte-ecology.github.io/conteStreamTemperature_northeast/.</SPAN></A></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Known Issues and Uncertainties</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>As with any project carried out across such a large area, this dataset is subject to limitations. The results by themselves are not a prescription for on-the-ground action; users are encouraged to verify, with field visits and site-specific knowledge, the value of any areas identified in the project. Known issues and uncertainties include the following:</SPAN></P><UL><LI><P><SPAN>Users are cautioned against using the data on too small an area (for example, a small segment of stream), as the data may not be sufficiently accurate at that level of resolution.</SPAN></P></LI><LI><P><SPAN>Uncertainties in predictions of stream temperature also result in uncertainties in Brook Trout occupancy estimates. Local effects of groundwater (which may provide cold-water refugia for Brook Trout) cannot be well accounted for in regional stream temperature models at this time. Catchments near waterbodies with water control structures such as dams may also have unreliable temperature predictions because the temperature model does not include information on release schedules or strategies.</SPAN></P></LI><LI><P><SPAN>Catchments with any Brook Trout occurrences reported in the past 30 years have been presumed to be occupied for purposes of the model. If local extirpations have occurred, this could lead to overprediction of the probability of Brook Trout occupancy.</SPAN></P></LI><LI><P><SPAN>Projections of effects of future temperature changes to Brook Trout occupancy are intended to convey a sense of the resilience of the species to changing temperatures. In reality, stream temperatures will not change at the same rate or uniformly, as some streams are more buffered against changing air temperatures than others.</SPAN></P></LI><LI><P><SPAN>As with any regional GIS data, errors in mapping and alignment of hydrography, development, agriculture, and a number of other data layers can affect the model results.</SPAN></P></LI></UL><P><SPAN /></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Service Item Id: fd0b1918c2ec49dc9cb900efeda5207b
Copyright Text: Daniel Hocking and Ben Letcher, USGS Silvio O. Conte Anadromous Fish Research Center
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>This dataset is one of a suite of products from the Nature’s Network project (</SPAN><A href="http://naturesnetwork.org"><SPAN>naturesnetwork.org</SPAN></A><SPAN>). Nature’s Network is a collaborative effort to identify shared priorities for conservation in the Northeast, considering the value of fish and wildlife species and the natural areas they inhabit. Brook Trout probability of occurrence is intended to provide predictions of occupancy (probability of presence) for catchments smaller than 200 km2 in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic region from Virginia to Maine. The dataset provides predictions under current environmental conditions and for future increases in stream temperature. Brook Trout probability of occurrence (under current climate) is one input used in developing “Lotic Core Areas, Stratified by Watershed, Northeast U.S.” that is also part of Nature’s Network. Lotic core areas represent intact, well-connected rivers and stream reaches in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic region that, if protected as part of stream networks and watersheds, will continue to support a broad diversity of aquatic species and the ecosystems on which they depend. The combination of lotic core areas, lentic (lake and pond) core areas, and aquatic buffers constitute the “aquatic core networks” of Nature’s Network. These and other datasets that augment or complement aquatic core networks are available in the Nature’s Network gallery: </SPAN><A href="https://nalcc.databasin.org/galleries/8f4dfe780c444634a45ee4acc930a055"><SPAN>https://nalcc.databasin.org/galleries/8f4dfe780c444634a45ee4acc930a055.</SPAN></A></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Intended Uses</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>In the context of Nature’s Network, this dataset is primarily intended to be used in conjunction with the product “Lotic Core Areas, Stratified by Watershed, Northeast U.S.” to better understand the importance of core areas to Brook Trout. It also can be used on its own to identify priority watersheds for Brook Trout. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>The dataset was originally developed for and is part of the Interactive Catchment Explorer (ICE). ICE (</SPAN><A href="http://ice.ecosheds.org/)"><SPAN>http://ice.ecosheds.org/) </SPAN></A><SPAN>is a dynamic visualization interface for exploring catchment characteristics and environmental model predictions. ICE was created for resource managers and researchers to explore complex, multivariate environmental datasets and model results, to identify spatial patterns related to ecological conditions, and to prioritize locations for restoration or further study. ICE is part of the Spatial Hydro-Ecological Decision System (SHEDS).</SPAN></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Description and Derivation</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>The dataset provides predictions under current environmental conditions and for future increases in stream temperature of 2, 4, and 6 degrees Celsius. It employs a logistic mixed effects model to include the effects of landscape, land-use, and climate variables on the probability of Brook Trout occupancy in stream reaches (confluence to confluence). It includes random effects of HUC10 (watershed) to allow for the chance that the probability of occupancy and the effect of covariates were likely to be similar within a watershed. The fish data came primarily from state and federal agencies that sample streams for Brook Trout as part of regular monitoring. A stream is considered occupied if any Brook Trout were ever caught during an electrofishing survey between 1991 and 2010. The results are based on more than 15,000 samples from more than 13,000 catchments from all 13 Northeast states.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Factors that had a strong positive effect on Brook Trout occupancy included percent forest cover and summer precipitation. Factors that had a strong negative effect on occupancy included July stream temperature, percent agriculture, drainage area, and percent upstream impounded area.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Estimates of the probability of occupancy for each catchment with increases in stream temperature of either 2,4 or 6 degrees C are also provided. To provide these estimates, the input values for mean July stream temperature were simply increased by 2, 4, or 6 C and estimated occupancies recorded.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>More technical details about the Brook Trout probability of occurrence product are available at: </SPAN><A href="http://conte-ecology.github.io/Northeast_Bkt_Occupancy/"><SPAN>http://conte-ecology.github.io/Northeast_Bkt_Occupancy/. </SPAN></A><SPAN>Technical details about the regional stream temperature model, which is used in predicting Brook Trout occupancy, are available at: </SPAN><A href="http://conte-ecology.github.io/conteStreamTemperature_northeast/"><SPAN>http://conte-ecology.github.io/conteStreamTemperature_northeast/.</SPAN></A></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Known Issues and Uncertainties</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>As with any project carried out across such a large area, this dataset is subject to limitations. The results by themselves are not a prescription for on-the-ground action; users are encouraged to verify, with field visits and site-specific knowledge, the value of any areas identified in the project. Known issues and uncertainties include the following:</SPAN></P><UL><LI><P><SPAN>Users are cautioned against using the data on too small an area (for example, a small segment of stream), as the data may not be sufficiently accurate at that level of resolution.</SPAN></P></LI><LI><P><SPAN>Uncertainties in predictions of stream temperature also result in uncertainties in Brook Trout occupancy estimates. Local effects of groundwater (which may provide cold-water refugia for Brook Trout) cannot be well accounted for in regional stream temperature models at this time. Catchments near waterbodies with water control structures such as dams may also have unreliable temperature predictions because the temperature model does not include information on release schedules or strategies.</SPAN></P></LI><LI><P><SPAN>Catchments with any Brook Trout occurrences reported in the past 30 years have been presumed to be occupied for purposes of the model. If local extirpations have occurred, this could lead to overprediction of the probability of Brook Trout occupancy.</SPAN></P></LI><LI><P><SPAN>Projections of effects of future temperature changes to Brook Trout occupancy are intended to convey a sense of the resilience of the species to changing temperatures. In reality, stream temperatures will not change at the same rate or uniformly, as some streams are more buffered against changing air temperatures than others.</SPAN></P></LI><LI><P><SPAN>As with any regional GIS data, errors in mapping and alignment of hydrography, development, agriculture, and a number of other data layers can affect the model results.</SPAN></P></LI></UL><P><SPAN /></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Service Item Id: fd0b1918c2ec49dc9cb900efeda5207b
Copyright Text: Daniel Hocking and Ben Letcher, USGS Silvio O. Conte Anadromous Fish Research Center
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Freshwater Resilience, Highest and High, Watersheds for Complex and Non-complex Stream Networks, Northeast U.S. is one of a suite of products from the Nature’s Network project (naturesnetwork.org).</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>As growing human populations increase the pace of climate and land use changes, estimating the resilience of freshwater systems will be increasingly important for delivering effective long-term conservation. A region-wide analysis of freshwater stream networks was developed by Mark Anderson and associates at The Nature Conservancy (Anderson et al., 2013) to estimate the capacity of each network to cope with climatic and environmental change. The analysis centered on the evaluation resiliency: characteristics that may allow stream ecosystems to maintain diversity and function within a dynamic climate, and that could be modeled in GIS with confidence at the regional scale and were not highly correlated with each other. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Please find the full report at </SPAN><A href="http://www.conservationgateway.org/ConservationByGeography/NorthAmerica/UnitedStates/edc/Documents/FW%20resilience_report_11_2013_distribute.docx"><SPAN>http://www.conservationgateway.org/ConservationByGeography/NorthAmerica/UnitedStates/edc/Documents/FW%20resilience_report_11_2013_distribute.docx</SPAN></A></P><P><SPAN>This dataset was derived from the analysis of freshwater resilience of stream networks in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic region. A stream network was defined as a continuous system of functionally connected streams, rivers, and lakes bounded by dams or upper headwaters. To facilitate combination with other Nature’s Network products, stream networks were delineated into watersheds (roughly HUC 10/12), rather than stream networks, in this version. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>The high and highest relative resiliency watersheds identified in this product are those that, compared to other watersheds with similar native fish composition, rate higher than average on seven characteristics correlated with resilience. These included four physical properties (stream network length, number of size classes, number of gradients classes and number of temperature classes), and three condition characteristics (risk of hydrologic alterations, natural cover in the floodplain, and amount of impervious surface in the watershed). Because biota and physical processes are linked to the size of bodies of water, watersheds of stream networks which contain a variety of stream and lake sizes are expected to be more resilient by providing varied habitats and refugia, allowing native species to persist.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Watersheds with at least five size classes are highlighted as “complex” in this product. There was high correspondence between complex and high/highest relative resiliency-rated stream networks, and The Nature Conservancy’s portfolio of freshwater priority rivers (available as a separate dataset). A separate dataset which includes all stream networks across the full range of resiliency scores is also available, but note that stream networks do not correspond to HUC 12 watersheds used in other Nature’s Network aquatic products: </SPAN><A href="https://nalcc.databasin.org/datasets/6fe82a3f1caa45aaafd65907abc4c38d"><SPAN>https://nalcc.databasin.org/datasets/6fe82a3f1caa45aaafd65907abc4c38d</SPAN></A></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Intended Uses</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>This dataset is included in the Nature’s Network package as an overlay for the purpose of supplementing the Aquatic Core Networks, which are comprised of Lotic and Lentic Core Areas and Aquatic Buffers: </SPAN><A href="https://nalcc.databasin.org/datasets/3eeab562664b421ebc1b830151e8b4db"><SPAN>https://nalcc.databasin.org/datasets/3eeab562664b421ebc1b830151e8b4db</SPAN></A></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Description and Derivation</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Analysis of resiliency and complexity were carried out on the level of stream network. All stream networks at least 3.2km long with watersheds greater than 100km2 were included. These constitute 78% of all stream kilometers in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic regions.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Similar stream networks were compared within an appropriate context by subdividing the region according to two nested classifications: Freshwater Ecoregion (World Wildlife Fund, Abell et al., 2008), patterns of native fish distribution resulting from large-scale geoclimatic processes and evolutionary history; and fish regions, defined by cluster analysis of native species occurrence data from NatureServe.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Resiliency scores were calculated from physical properties (stream network length, number of size classes, number of gradients classes and number of temperature classes), and condition characteristics (risk of hydrologic alterations, natural cover in the floodplain, and amount of impervious surface in the watershed). Complex stream networks were distinguished from non-complex as those containing five or more size stream, river, and lake size classes.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>The high and highest resiliency stream networks included in this dataset were identified as follows:</SPAN></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-style:italic;">Highest Relative Resilience</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>1) Scores for physical properties and condition characteristics were each >=0.5 SD (above average) compared with all functionally connected stream reaches assessed within their freshwater ecoregion or fish region, or</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>2) The sum of the physical properties and condition scores was at least 1.5 SD above the mean and the lowest score was between -0.5 and 0.5 SD (within the range of the mean) within their freshwater ecoregion or fish region.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-style:italic;">High Relative Resilience</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>1) Scores for physical properties and condition characteristics were each above the calculated mean (> 0 z-unit) but one or both were less than 0.5 SD within their freshwater ecoregion or fish region, or</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>2) The sum of both scores was at least >1 SD above the mean and both the physical property and condition score were between -0.5 and 0.5 SD (within the range of the mean) for their freshwater ecoregion or fish region).</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Stream networks were translated into watersheds by delineating the land draining into the stream and rivers of each functional network using the “watershed” command run on the NHD Plus Medium Resolution 30m flow direction grids distributed by USGS and TNC’s hydrology lines (which break at dams).</SPAN></P><P><SPAN STYLE="font-weight:bold;">Known Issues and Uncertainties</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>As with any project carried out across such a large area, this product is subject to limitations. The results by themselves are not a prescription for on-the-ground action; users are encouraged to verify, with field visits and site-specific knowledge, the value of any areas identified in the project. Known issues and uncertainties include the following:</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Fish regions are based on lists of native species present within each HUC, which in turn depend on data from Natural Heritage program mapping. That data is suject to variation in the suite of species tracked within each jurisdiction. Additionally, there are gaps in geographic coverage both within and among states with variation in survey effort.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Access to groundwater, would ideally be included in the set of measurable elements used characterize the resilience of freshwater systems, was excluded from this analysis due to data limitations at this scale.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Service Item Id: fd0b1918c2ec49dc9cb900efeda5207b
Copyright Text: Arlene Olivero, Mark Anderson, The Nature Conservancy, Eastern Division