1 / 13

Advancing Hydrologic Observatories Through HydroView: Status Report and Future Directions

This status report by Richard P. Hooper outlines the critical developments and strategic directions for the HydroView initiative, spearheaded by the Consortium of Universities for the Advancement of Hydrologic Sciences, Inc. It details the evolution from prototype to a proposed “test-bed,” highlighting the collaborative efforts among diverse scientific communities. Key outcomes include consensus on the importance of hydrologic observatories, identification of common science questions, and a timeline for implementation. The report emphasizes the need for coordinated action and funding to support the ongoing development of hydrologic research infrastructure.

halil
Télécharger la présentation

Advancing Hydrologic Observatories Through HydroView: Status Report and Future Directions

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. Hydrologic Observatories and HydroView: A Status Report Richard P. Hooper,Executive DirectorConsortium of Universities for the Advancement of Hydrologic Sciences, Inc.

  2. HydroView

  3. Revised HydroView HO HIS HMF NCHS

  4. From Prototype to “Test-bed” • Clarify relationship among Hydroview elements • Dependent on prototype outcome • Coordinate implementation among elements • Dependent upon funding

  5. Proposed HOs from Logan

  6. Observatory Status • Summit meeting—Friday March 4, 2005 • Engineering, Weathering, Limnology, Ecology, Carbon Cycle, and Hydrology Communities • Briefing of Assistant Directors—by early April, 2005 • Decision on proceeding with “Test bed” • Development of MREFC package

  7. Summit Results • Consensus that “HOs” are a useful part for all communities’ observatories • Common “test-bed” is feasible • Developing common science questions for eventual MREFC package

  8. Common Science Issues • Heterogeneity—human and “natural” • Episodic and extreme events • Amplification/Filtering • Scaling in time and space • Coupling and interfaces • Switches, lags and pulses

  9. Common Science Questions • How does landscape heterogeneity control the magnitude and frequency of floods and droughts? • How does landscape heterogeneity control nutrient, sediment and contaminant fluxes and impact ecosystem structure and function? • How do human activities and natural processes combine to determine the structure of landscape heterogeneity?

  10. Timeline • To MS Word

  11. Implementation Plan • HIS • Hand-off of design to CHI(?) • Support of HO’s by early 2006 • HMF • Design of facility for Dec. 2005 • HO Support through Instrumentation Panels • Geophysical “science” product

  12. Implementation Plan-2 • HO • Award—March, 2005 • Year 1—Design/Data assimilation • Year 2&3—Data collection • Year 4 & on—”Permanent facility” • NCHS • Initial working groups • Establishment of IRAs and open competition

  13. Summary • Moving from concept to prototype to facility • More precise definition raises questions of integration and roles • Coordination among HydroView elements needed • Re-engage community

More Related