Skip to main content

Arthur Cooper

thumbnail
The main objective of this project was to develop a dataset of large, anthropogenic barriers that are spatially linked to the National Hydrography Dataset Plus Version 1 (NHDPlusV1) for the conterminous U.S. and the high resolution National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) for Alaska (1:63,000 scale) and Hawaii (1:24,000 scale) to facilitate GIS analyses based on the NHDPlusV1/NHD and NID datasets. To meet this objective, Michigan State University conducted a spatial linkage of the point dataset of the 2009 National Inventory of Dams (NID) created by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to the NHDPlusV1/NHD. The pool of dam data included were modified based on 1) dam removals that occurred after development of the...
thumbnail
Regional assessment of cumulative impacts of dams on riverine fish assemblages provides resource managers essential information for dam operation, potential dam removal, river health assessment and overall ecosystem management. Such an assessment is challenging because characteristics of fish assemblages are not only affected by dams, but also influenced by natural variation and human-induced modification (in addition to dams) in thermal and flow regimes, physicochemical habitats and biological assemblages. This study evaluated the impacts of dams on river fish assemblages in the non-impoundment sections of rivers in the states of Michigan and Wisconsin using multiple fish assemblage indicators and multiple approaches...
thumbnail
Key elements of the 2015 national assessment of stream fish habitats follow the 2010 assessment, including: 1) the idea that distributions and numbers fishes reflect the quality of habitat in which they live; and 2) human landscape factors pose a risk to the condition of stream habitat, and indirectly, to fishes. The 2015 inland stream assessments for the contiguous United States, Alaska, and Hawaii all followed five broad steps (Figure 1) that are described in detail below for the inland stream assessment for Alaska. Note that analytical details for the Alaska assessment differed in southeast Alaska as compared to the remainder of the state (referred to as greater Alaska) due to differences in the resolution of...
Tags: 2015, Alaska, Method
Accounting for natural variation With the exception of differences in spatial units, assessments for greater Alaska and southeast Alaska were conducted similarly across regions. Because stream fish assemblage data were not available for the state, no steps were taken to account for natural variation in stream habitats for either southeast or greater Alaska. This represents an important need for future work.
Tags: 2015, Alaska, Method
thumbnail
State-wide data on fish populations were limited in Alaska for use in this assessment, as was a detailed spatial (mapping) framework that fully characterizes watersheds throughout the state at the time this assessment was conducted. Because of these factors, we modified our assessment methods to account for these limitations. Twenty-one landscape disturbance variables were assembled from medium-sized watersheds throughout the state (i.e., 12-digit hydrologic unit code watersheds). Variables were then assigned to one of six categories based on their disturbances to stream habitats. Categories include: urban land use, agricultural land use, point source pollution and water quality, barriers to fish movement, human...
View more...
ScienceBase brings together the best information it can find about USGS researchers and offices to show connections to publications, projects, and data. We are still working to improve this process and information is by no means complete. If you don't see everything you know is associated with you, a colleague, or your office, please be patient while we work to connect the dots. Feel free to contact sciencebase@usgs.gov.