CSU’s EPA-FUNDED
PROGRAM ON
SPACE-TIME AQUATIC RESOURCE
MODELING and ANALYSIS PROGRAM
(STARMAP)
N. SCOTT URQUHART
SENIOR RESEARCH SCIENTIST
DEPARTMENT OF STATISTICS
COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY
# 1
TODAY
 EPA’s REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS (RFA)
 CSU’s RESPONSE = STARMAP
 EXPANSION ON PROJECT #4
 = LEARNING MATERIALS
 EXAMPLES OF TECHNIQUES
# 2
EPA’s REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS
(RFA)
 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS
 RESEARCH IN STATISTICS
 DIRECTED TOWARD USING, IN PART, DATA GATHERED BY
PROBABILITY SURVEYS OF THE “EMAP-SORT.”
 TRAINING OF “FUTURE GENERATIONS” OF
ENVIRONMENTAL STATISTICIANS
 OUTREACH TO THE STATES and TRIBES
 ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
# 3
EPA’s REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS
(RFA) - continued
 MAJOR ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENT
 “… EACH OF THE TWO PROGRAMS
ESTABLISHED WILL INVOLVE COLLABORATIVE
RESEARCH AT MULTIPLE, GEOGRAPHICALLY
DIVERSE SITES.”
 CLOSE COOPERATION BETWEEN TWO
PROGRAMS
 CSU and OSU SUBMITTED A PAIR OF
COORDINATED PROPOSALS
# 4
EPA’s REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS
(RFA) - continued III
 THE TWO PROGRAMS:
 DESIGN-BASED/MODEL ASSISTED SURVEY
METHODOLOGY - @ OSU
 SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL MODELING,
INCORPORATING HIERARCHICAL SURVEY
DESIGN, DATA ANALYSIS, MODELING - @ CSU
 CHECK ON THE RFA @
 http://es.epa.gov/ncerqa/rfa/aquastat01.html
# 5
RESPONSE to RFA from CSU
 INSTITUTIONS:
 COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY
 STATISTICS
 NATURAL RESOURCES ECOLOGY LAB
 FOREST SCIENCE
 BIORESOURCE AND AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING
 OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY (PROGRAM 1, too)
 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COASTAL WATER
RESEARCH PROJECT
 WATER QUALITY TECHNOLOGY, INC
# 6
WHO IS INVOLVED?
 Jay Breidt
 Richard Davis
 Jennifer Hoeting
 Hari Iyer
 Scott Urquhart
 Dave Theobald - Natural Resources Ecology Lab
 Robin Reich - Forest Science
 Jim Loftis - Bioresources Engineering
 Collaborators at OSU, SCCWRP, WQTI
# 7
CSU PROPOSAL - APPROACH
 TAKE EXISTING SETS OF
 PROBABILITY &
 NON-PROBABILITY DATA
 START WORKING WITH THE DATA WITH A
PERSPECTIVE OF DRAWING INFERENCES
 IDENTIFY ISSUES WE DON’T KNOW HOW TO HANDLE
 HAVE POST-DOCS AND PRE-DOCTORAL STUDENTS
CONDUCT RESEARCH ON THESE TOPICS
# 8
WHAT IS DISTINCTIVE ABOUT
“AQUATIC RESOURCES”?
 THEY ARE THINGS LIKE
 STREAMS
 RIVERS
 WETLANDS
 LAKES & PONDS
 ESTUARIES
 PRAIRIE POTHOLES
 NEAR COASTAL OCEANIC WATERS
# 9
WHAT IS DISTINCTIVE ABOUT’
“AQUATIC RESOURCES”?
CONTINUED
 FOR MOST AQUATIC RESOURCES,
 THERE ARE MANY “SMALL” ONES
 PROGRESSIVELY FEWER AS THEY GET BIGGER
INTEREST, BIOLOGICAL & SOCIETAL, TENDS TO
STAY CONSTANT OR EVEN INCREASE WITH SIZE
 SIMPLE RANDOM SAMPLING WOULD SELECT
MOSTLY “SMALL” ONES, FEW “BIG” ONES.
 IMPLICATION:
 UNEQUAL PROBABILITY SAMPLING
# 10
WHAT IS DISTINCTIVE ABOUT’
“AQUATIC RESOURCES”?
CONTINUED II
 SPATIAL STATISTICS TENDS TO FOCUS ON
TWO-DIMENSIONAL SPACE
 STREAMS AND RIVERS ESSENTIALLY AMOUNT
TO ONE-DIMENSIONAL OBJECTS IN TWO-SPACE
 BUT MUCH LANDSCAPE INFORMATION IS
COMPLETE COVERAGE IN TWO-SPACE
 CHALLENGE:
MERGE THESE PERSPECTIVES
# 11
FUTURE NEEDS - STATES & TRIBES
 STATES AND TRIBES MUST REPORT ON THE
CONDITION OF ALL “WATERS” UNDER
THEIR JURISTICTION
 A REQUIREMENT OF SECTION 305b OF THE
CLEAN WATER ACT
 RESULTS IN BIANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS
 STARTING IN 2002 THE RECOMMENDED
STANDARDS WILL CHANGE TO BEING
BASED ON PROBABILITY SAMPLING
 OUTREACH PROJECT OPPORTUNITY!
# 12
CSU PROPOSAL - CONTENT
 1. COMBINING ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
 2. LOCAL INFERENCE
 3. DEVELOPING AQUATIC INDICATORS
 4. OUTREACH
 5. ADMINISTRATION/COORDINATION
# 13
CSU PROPOSAL - CONTENT
CONTINUED
 1. COMBINING ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
 FROM SURVEYS TO REMOTELY SENSED
 POSSIBLY INCLUDING INFORMATION FROM
“HAND-PICKED”SITES
 JENNIFER HOETING
 DAVIS, BREIDT, REICH,
STEVENS (OSU), WEISBERG (SCCWRP),
LEECASTER (INL)
# 14
CSU PROPOSAL - CONTENT
CONTINUED
 2. LOCAL INFERENCE
 SMALL AREA EST’M + DECONVOLUTION
 JAY BREIDT
 DAVIS, HOETING, GITELMAN (OSU)
# 15
CSU PROPOSAL - CONTENT
CONTINUED II
 3. AQUATIC INDICATORS
 DEVELOPING DATA TO USE IN SPATIAL
ANALYSES
 LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY
 REGIONAL TAXONOMIC RICHNESS
 DAVE THEOBALD, NATURAL RESOURCES
ECOLOGY LAB
 URQUHART, RITTER (SCCWRP)
# 16
CSU PROPOSAL - CONTENT
CONTINUED III
 OUTREACH
 “PROPOSALS SHOULD SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS
THE EXTENSION OF EXPERTISE ON DESIGN AND
ANALYSIS TO STATES AND TRIBES”
 HARI IYER & NSU PREPARED THIS PART OF THE
CSU RESPONSE
 DAVIS, REICH,
 JIM LOFTIS (BIORESOURCES ENGINEERING),
 STEPHEN JOHNSON (WATER QUALITY TECHNOLOGY)
# 17
CSU PROPOSAL - CONTENT
CONTINUED III
 5. ADMINISTRATION
 INTEGRATION AND COORDINATION
 URQUHART & DAVIS
 STEVENS (OSU)
 AQUATIC SUPPORT: HERLIHY & HUGHES (OSU)
# 18
CSU PROPOSAL - FUNDED ACTIVITIES
APPROXIMATE ANNUAL LEVELS
 POST DOCTORAL FELLOWS
2.5
 DOCTORAL STUDENTS
2
 FACULTY TIME
~ 1 FTE (12M)
 OTHER
 SUBCONTRACT TO OSU
~ $120K
 COMPUTING EQUIPMENT - ONE TIME =$20K
 SUPPORT/TRAVEL
AMPLE
# 19
OSU COMPANION PROPOSAL
 SIMILARILY STRUCTURED
 MAJOR DIFFERENCE = FOCUS
 DESIGN-BASED/MODEL ASSISTED
 OSU SUBCONTRACT TO CSU THE SAME
SCALE AS CSU SUBCONTRACT TO OSU
 BOTH PROGRAMS HAVE OTHER
SUBCONTRACTORS THE FIRST YEAR
# 20
DISTINCTIVE EMAP PERSPECTIVE
 DEFINE THE POPULATION OF INTEREST
 CONDUCT A PROBABILITY SURVEY OF IT
 CAREFULLY DEFINE THE SAMPLING FRAME
 VARIABLE PROBABILITY SELECTION OF SITES, BUT
WITH SPATIAL BALANCE
 CAREFULLY DEFINE RESPONSES TO BE EVALUATED
 TRAIN FIELD CREWS WELL
 MANAGE DATA WITH CARE AND AN “AUDIT TRAIL”
 LEARN FROM PAST MISTAKES, THROUGHOUT
# 21
DISTINCTIVE EMAP PERSPECTIVE
CONTINUED
 IF DISCIPLINES LACK TOOLS, SUPPORT
DEVELOPMENT OF THEM
 STATISTICS INCLUDED
 EXAMPLE: EXTEND CONCEPTS OF SAMPLING FROM
FINITE POPULATION TO SPATIALLY CONTINUOUS
POPULATIONS
 NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTER FOR STATISTICS AND THE
ENVIRONMENT (~ $1M/YEAR)
 UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON PAST 5 YEARS
 NOW TO BE AT UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
 TWO PROGRAMS UNDER DISCUSSION HERE
# 22
FUTURE NEEDS - STATES & TRIBES
CONTINUED
 PROJECT # 4 WILL HELP
 IDENTIFY NEEDED SKILLS IN THE STATES &
TRIBES
 DEVELOP THE NEEDED SKILLS
IF POSSIBLE, WE HOPE TO TRANSMIT THE
LEARNING MATERIALS IN WEB-COMPATIBLE
DOCUMENTS
 RECORDED ON A CD ROM USABLE AT ANY
REMOTE SITE
# 23
MORE ON LEARNING TOOLS
 AN EXPANSION ON PROJECT 4:
# 24