Anna E. Normand is the one behind this CRS report (2 March 2021): 'U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Streamgaging Network: Overview and Issues for Congress'.
Download CRS_Report_USGS_Streamgaging_Network_2March2021
I don't often comment on CRS reports that I post but this one is an exception. I am not an expert (not even close!) on streamgaging and networks. This report has a lot of information on the state-of-the-art, among other things. So if you are like me, give it a look.
Click on the graphics to display/enlarge them. I went overboard with them.
Overview
Streamgages are fixed structures at streams, rivers, lakes, and reservoirsthat measure water level and related streamflow—the amount of water flowing through a water body over time. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in the Department of the Interior operates streamgages in every state, the District of Columbia, and the territories of Puerto Rico and Guam. The USGS Streamgaging Network encompasses 11,340 streamgages, which record water levels or streamflow for at least a portion of the year. Approximately 8,460 of these streamgages measure streamflow year round as part of the National Streamflow Network. The USGS also deploys
temporary rapid deployment gages to measure water levels during storm events, and select streamgages measure water quality.
Streamgages provide foundational information for diverse applications that affect a variety of constituents. The USGS disseminates streamgage data free to the public and responds to over 887 million requests on streamflows annually. Direct users of streamgage data include a variety of agencies at all levels of government, private companies, scientific institutions, and recreationists. Data from streamgages inform real-time decisionmaking and long-term planning on issues such as water management and energy development, infrastructure design, water compacts, water science research, flood mapping and forecasting, water quality, ecosystem management, and recreational safety.
Congress has provided the USGS with authority and appropriations to conduct surveys of streamflow since establishing the first hydrological survey in 1889. Many streamgages are operated cooperatively with nonfederal partners, which approach the USGS and sign joint-funding agreements to share the cost of streamgages and data collection. The USGS Cooperative Matching Funds (CMF) Program provides up to a 50% federal match with tribal, regional, state, and local partners. The average nonfederal cost-share contribution increased from approximately 50% in the early 1990s to approximately 69% in FY2020. In the early 2000s, the USGS designated federal priority streamgage (FPS) locations based on five identified national needs. The SECURE Water Act of 2009 (Title IX, Subtitle F, of P.L. 111-11) directed the USGS to operate no fewer than 4,700 federally funded streamgages by FY2019. In FY2020, 3,470 of the 4,760 FPSs designated by the USGS were operational, with 35% of FPSs funded solely by the USGS FPS program funds and the rest funded by a combination of federal and nonfederal funds.
Congressional appropriations and agreements with 1,400 nonfederal partners funded USGS streamgages at $194.9 million in FY2020. The USGS share included $24.7 million for FPSs and $29.4 million for cooperative streamgages through CMF. A dozen other federal agencies provided $38.0 million. Nonfederal partners, mostly affiliated with CMF, provided $102.8 million. In FY2021, Congress appropriated the same amount of funding as in FY2020 for FPS and CMF streamgages. Congress apropropriated $24.5 million in FY2021 for the Next Generation Water Observing System (NGWOS), an effort to establish dense water monitoring networks in representative watersheds in order to model streamflow in analogous watersheds.
The USGS uses appropriated funding to develop and maintain the USGS Streamgaging Network. The USGS and numerous stakeholders have raised funding considerations including user needs, priorities of partners, federal coverage, infrastructure repair, disaster response, inflation, and technological advances. Some stakeholders advocate for maintaining or expanding the network. Others may argue that Congress should consider reducing the network in order to prioritize other activities and that other entities operate streamgages tailored to localized needs. Congress might also consider whether to invest in streamgage restoration and new technologies.
Congress may consider outlining the future direction for the USGS Streamgaging Network through oversight or legislation. The USGS failed to meet a deadline set by the SECURE Water Act of 2009 to operate no fewer than 4,700 FPSs by FY2019. Congress has provided level funding for FPSs while directing the USGS through appropriations legislation to increase investment in the NGWOS. Congress may consider such policy options as pursuing both the FPS mandate and the NGWOS simultaneously, amending the SECURE Water Act of 2009, and determining the relative emphasis of the NGWOS in the agency’s streamgaging enterprise.
And how about this Delaware River Basin project:
“Midlife crisis is climbing to the top of the ladder only to discover that it’s been leaning against the wrong wall.” – Joseph Campbell
Comments