Rapid Emergence of Massive Temperature
Monitoring Networks in Streams & Rivers
Across North America
Dan Isaak, US Forest Service
Rocky Mountain Research Station
Growth
Temperature TMDL Standards &
Effects on Aquatic Organisms
Stream Temperature (˚C)
18
TMDL limit
14
10
6
Time
Temperature
Too Hot!
Miniature Temperature Sensors
Sensor model
Accuracy
Battery life &
memory
Hobo Pro v2
+/-0.2°C
6 years
$123
Tidbit v2
+/-0.2°C
5 years
$133
iButton
+/-0.5°C
1 year
$20 – 40
Tinytag Aquatic 2
+/-0.5°C
1 year
$170
Cost
Stream
Temperature (˚C)
Stream
Temperature (˚C)
Continuous Temperature
Record from Each Sensor
22
Many measurements
each day (12 – 48)
18
14
10
8/14
25
Daily Cycles
8/15
8/16
8/17
8/18
8/19
Seasonal/Annual Cycles
20
15
10
5
0
2/11/2012 5/21/2012 8/29/2012 12/7/2012 3/17/2013 6/25/2013 10/3/201
-5
Temperature Data Collection is Ubiquitous
Regional Database Aggregation
Projects Are Underway
Free
millions!
>60 agencies
>45,000,000 hourly records
>15,000 unique sites
Jana Stewart &
Colleagues
We Monitor Lots of Sites,
Sensor sites
Idaho/western Montana sites
but only in the summer & …
Summer
Isaak et al. 2013. A simple protocol using underwater epoxy to install annual temperature
monitoring sites in rivers and streams. USFS General Technical Report, 314.
Sensor sites
We Monitor Lots of Sites,
Idaho/western Montana sites
& not for very long
Isaak et al. 2013. A simple protocol using underwater epoxy to install annual temperature
monitoring sites in rivers and streams. USFS General Technical Report, 314.
Epoxy Protocol for Annual Monitoring
Annual Flooding
Concerns
Underwater epoxy cement
$130 = 5 years of data
Data retrieved
from underwater
Sensors glued to large
boulders & bridges
Isaak et al. 2013. USFS Report;
Isaak & Horan 2011. NAJFM 31:134-137
Example Monitoring Networks…
Dense sensor arrays for landscape analysis
Boise River Basin – 7,000 hectares
NoRRTN: Northern Rockies
River Temperature Network
•n > 500 sites;
•Cost = $100,000;
•3 months time
for 2 technicians;
•2,500 years data
Interagency Monitoring Networks
>3,000 sites in Northwest U.S.
Continental Network is Emerging
>500 new sites last year
GoogleMap Tool at “Stream Temperature
Monitoring and Modeling” website
BIG DATA =
BIG INFORMATION?
~45,000,000
hourly records
BIG DATA are often Autocorrelated
Spatial Statistical Network Models
Valid interpolation on networks
Let’s us connect
the dots…
…for aggregated databases
Advantages:
-flexible & valid autocovariance structures
that accommodate network topology & nonindependence among observations
-improved predictive ability & parameter
estimates relative to non-spatial models
Ver Hoef et al. 2006; Ver Hoef & Peterson 2010; Peterson & Ver Hoef 2013
Regional Temperature Model
Accurate stream temp
model
+
Cross-jurisdictional “maps”
of stream climate scenarios
Consistent datum for
strategic assessments
across 500,000 stream
kilometers
Example: Clearwater River Basin
Data extracted from NorWeST
16,700 stream kilometers
>5,000 August means
>1,000 stream sites
19 summers (1993-2011)
Clearwater R.
•Temperature site
Salmon R.
Example: Clearwater River Basin
Data extracted from NorWeST
16,700 stream kilometers
>5,000 August means
>1,000 stream sites
19 summers (1993-2011)
Clearwater R.
•Temperature site
Salmon R.
Clearwater River Temp Model
n = 4,487
1. Elevation (m)
2. Canopy (%)
3. Stream slope (%)
4. Ave Precipitation (mm)
5. Latitude (km)
6. Lakes upstream (%)
7. Baseflow Index
8. Watershed size (km2)
Predicted ( C)
Covariate Predictors
Mean August Temperature
9. Discharge (m3/s)
USGS gage data
10. Air Temperature (˚C)
RegCM3 NCEP reanalysis
Hostetler et al. 2011
25
r2 = 0.95; RMSE = 0.60°C
20
15
10
Spatial Model
5
5
10
15
20
Observed ( C)
25
Historical Year Sequence (1993-2011)
Mean August Temperature - Clearwater Basin
So format these consistently, then save as .emf to reduce size and embed
25
Predicted
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
Clearwater R.
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
2006
2008
2009
2011
1999
2000
2002
2003
2004
2005
2007
2010
2001
r²
r² == 0.87
0.88
0.92
0.89
0.97
0.96
0.95
0.94
0.98
0.93
20
15
10
5
0
0
5
10
15
20
25
Observed
20
Air Temp (C)
Discharge (m3/s)
18
60
50
16
Temperature ( C)
14
40
12
30
10
20
8
6
1992
10
1997
2002
2007
2012
Climate Scenario Sequence
1993-2011
Composite
The BLOB…it just keeps growing…
 171,000 stream kilometers of thermal ooze
 16,688 summers of data swallowed
Climate Scenario Sequence
2040’s
1993-2011
A1B
Composite
Scenario
The BLOB…it just keeps growing…
 171,000 stream kilometers of thermal ooze
 16,688 summers of data swallowed
Climate Scenario Sequence
2080’s
2040’s
1993-2011
A1B
Composite
Scenario
The BLOB…it just keeps growing…
 171,000 stream kilometers of thermal ooze
 16,688 summers of data swallowed
BLOB Technologies Going National
The Stream Internet Project
Goal: develop
analytical
infrastructure that
facilitates “Infinite
Scaling” of stream
data through space
& time
Spatial Stream Models are Generalizable
Distribution
& abundance
Response
Metrics
•Gaussian
•Poissan
•Binomial
Stream
Temperature
Statistical stream models
Genetic
Attributes
Water Quality
Parameters
& There’s Lots of Data to Generalize About…
Temperature
Fish
surveys
(Wenger et al. 2011)
Discharge – USGS NWIS
Water Quality
(Olsen & Hawkins 2010)
Additional Resources…
Websites (Google Search On…)
1) SSN/STARS – statistical modeling of data
on networks
2) NorWeST – regional stream temperature
database & climate scenarios
3) Stream Temperature Modeling & Monitoring
Data…
Publications…
Software…