Oregon CUSP-NHD Integration Randy Dana Oregon Coastal Management Program FIT Funding Presentation April 29th, 2015, Portland, OR Proposal to Oregon Geographic Information Council (OGIC) Framework Data Development Program for the 2015 – 2017 Biennium

Overview What is the Shoreline Working Group effort all about? o Workgroup of the Coastal Marine Data Network FIT o A Team that reviews shoreline datasets, agrees upon appropriate use, and documents those findings. What is the overall goal of this project? To develop/adopt a set of standardized datasets that can be shared and exchanged with the Oregon GIS community. From NOAA FAQ: What is the legal U.S. shoreline? There is no legal reference that designates one specific shoreline as the legal shoreline. Furthermore, there is no simple answer to this question as there are many legal, technical, and general uses of the terms related to shoreline (shoreline, coastline, baseline, mean high water line, mean low water line, etc.).

Working Group Approach : 3 meetings (with online components) o Communications handled through announcements to the Oregon Coastal and Marine Data Network (OCMDN) listserv Discussion / summary of shorelines for legal uses o Vertical Datums (as related to tidal shorelines) o Jurisdictions and other legalities o LWNPVko1LWF2RXc LWNPVko1LWF2RXc Discussion / summary of shorelines for non-legal uses o Inventories o Spatial Analyses o Cartography o Ep2ZzNvRXNHd1E Ep2ZzNvRXNHd1E Discussion surrounding NOAA CUSP Shoreline and uses in Oregon To match application/intent of data use to the appropriate resource

NOAA has released a new Shoreline Product (CUSP) Thanks to : Stephen White and Doug Graham from the Remote Sensing Division of NOAA’s National Geodetic Survey, for a great overview of NOAA shoreline products and activities.

NOAA Continually Updated Shoreline Product (CUSP)

OCMP has created an “Oregon-enhanced” CUSP New Data Set generated using similar methods to the NOAA CUSP, focused on making the best shoreline for Oregon, including estuaries

Benefits of CUSP Authoritative source (NOAA) Known vintage Known datum In Oregon, virtually all of the outer CUSP coast is derived from lidar In Oregon, OCMP has generated compatible estuarine shorelines from lidar (using CUSP methods)

NHD-CUSP Comparisons

Issues with NHD Coastline The origin of “Coastline” geometry in NHD is largely unknown (probably DLG) The south coast is particularly poor Same for the shoreline portions of “NHDWaterbody” and “NHDArea” The NHD Standard specifies Mean High Water (MHW) for the coastline CUSP is a great opportunity to meet the NHD standard with authoritative geometry

What will it take? The process will require the existing NHD coastline to be stripped out of the NHDFlowline Feature layer, and edge-matched to the new NOAA shoreline. Existing NHD flowlines will need to be reconnected to the coastline to maintain the NHD flow network, Water areas represented in the NHDArea and NHDWaterbody feature classes will be updated accordingly. Finally, the watershed boundaries at the HUC8 level (WBDHU8) will also need to be updated to be made compatible with the new line work.

What will it take? The work will be done on a watershed by watershed basis, as dictated by NHD editing practices and tools. Overall 13 HUC8 watersheds will be touched, approx 3-4 per quarter DeliverableTimeframe Phase I: Work Plan coordination, and development of Edit Methods work flows6 months Phase II: Mechanical NHD-CUSP integration work (by HUC8) Quarter I: Chetco, Lower Rogue, Sixes9 months Quarter II: Coquille, Coos, Umpqua12 months Quarter III: Siltcoos, Siuslaw, Alsea, Siletz-Yaquina15 months Quarter IV: Wilson-Trask-Nestucca, Nehalem, Necanicum18 months Phase III: Review loop built in for any data clean up required by USGS18-22 months *Note: Elapsed time from project start date.

Process Phase I: work with USGS and NRCS and members of PNW Hydro to establish a preferred data integration workflow Phase II: DOGAMI NHD editor to edit coastal NHD watershed by watershed, with quarterly frequent check-ins to ensure progress and verify results Phase III: Reserved for feedback loop with NHD stewards and any needed editing clean-up

Budget TaskEst. HoursCost Phase I: Schema development with participating agency partners 40In kind Phase II: Mechanical NHD-CUSP integration work Quarter I: Chetco, Lower Rogue, SixesTBD$11, Quarter II: Coquille, Coos, UmpquaTBD$11, Quarter III: Siltcoos, Siuslaw, Alsea, Siletz-YaquinaTBD$11, Quarter IV: Wilson-Trask-Nestucca, Nehalem, NecanicumTBD$11, Phase III: Review loop for any data clean up required by USGS As Needed$5, Total $50,000.00

Questions? Randy Dana Jed Roberts