1 / 19

Survey Results on User Preferences for Elevation-Hydro Integration

This report summarizes the findings from a survey conducted among 60 individuals (30 federal and 30 non-federal) to gauge interest and preferences for elevation-hydro issues, specifically regarding the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) and the National Elevation Dataset (NED). A total of 30 surveys were completed, resulting in a 50% response rate. Key challenges identified include data inconsistencies and difficulties with Alaska-specific data. Suggestions for improving dataset integration and addressing these issues are also discussed.

brook
Télécharger la présentation

Survey Results on User Preferences for Elevation-Hydro Integration

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Ele-Hydro User-Community Survey Results

  2. Survey • Gauge interest and preferences of users for elevation-hydro issues • 16 questions distributed to 30 federal and 30 non-federal individuals • Surveys completed June 8 • 30 completed surveys – 50% response rate

  3. Please rate these NHD features in importance to your work:

  4. For braided stream situations, please rate the following options of representation:

  5. What, if any, issues/challenges do you currently encounter working with NHD and NED together? • 21 responses: • Inconsistency in the data (datasets do not match, scale differences): 17 responses • Difficulties with Alaska data: 3 responses • Issue with NHDArea polygon separations: 1 response

  6. Please explain your answer to the preceding question: • 11 responses: • Important to alleviate inconsistencies between NHD and NED: 7 responses • Ability to extract additional data (e.g. stream monitoring sites need elevation, catchments, erosional responses): 3 responses • Improve scale for resource planning and infrastructure design: 1 response

  7. Please rate the following options for inclusion in a possible integrated dataset:

  8. Any other comments? • 11 responses • General comments about the survey (clarification for answers given, thanks, need for more surveys, etc): 5 responses • Suggestions for IDS (EDNA may be a template, we need to integrate this ASAP, augmentation not replacement of NHD high resolution, need streamstats, generalization tool needed, inclusion of manmade alterations, multiple flow volume and velocity calculations):5 responses • Specific comments from the NHDPlus team (best practices, lessons learned, etc): 1 response

  9. Questions?

More Related