Strategic Plan

with implementation objectives for the period 1998-2002

Environmental Management Technical Center

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

July 1998
Strategic Plan

with implementation objectives for the period 1998-2002

July 1998

U.S. Geological Survey

Environmental Management Technical Center

575 Lester Avenue

Onalaska, Wisconsin 54650-8552

Environmental Management Technical Center
Mission

Provide information needed to support the sound

management of the Mississippi River.

Vision

To be recognized as a “Center of Excellence” in

large river sciences—supporting natural resource

management activities on the nation’s largest

floodplain river.

Guiding Principles

In fulfilling its mission, the Environmental

Management Technical Center (Center)

1. recognizes the Congressionally authorized

Upper Mississippi River Environmental

Management Program as the primary

focus of Center activities;

2. shares the common U.S. Geological Survey

goal of providing the nation with reliable,

impartial information to describe and understand the Earth;

3. understands that sound river management

requires accurate and unbiased information;

4. recognizes that establishing partnerships with

other research and management agencies is

critical to achieving Center objectives;

Overview

Providing sound science for better management

5. works to ensure that science activities remain

relevant to management questions; and

6. strives for excellence in its research, monitoring,

spatial analysis, and information sharing

activities through internal quality control and

external peer review.

Goals

In support of its mission, the Center has six

goals closely matching those of the authorizing

legislation and the U.S. Geological Survey. The

goals include the following:

1. Develop a better understanding of the

ecology of large rivers

2. Monitor resource change

3. Support the planning, implementation, and

evaluation of management actions

4. Facilitate the integration of natural resources

science throughout the Upper Mississippi

River basin

5. Support natural resource management

through geospatial technologies and analysis

6. Support decision making through sound data

management and information sharing

The river system contains hundreds of thousands of

acres of prime wetland habitat.

The Environmental Management Technical Center

conducts monitoring and analysis on over 1300 miles

of the Upper Mississippi River System.

Strategic Plan

iii
Section I - Introduction

Background ............................................................................................. 1

Purpose ................................................................................................... 1

Mission ................................................................................................... 2

Vision ................................................................................................... 2

Guiding Principles.................................................................................... 2

Center Goals ............................................................................................ 3

Historical Foundations ............................................................................. 3

Environmental Management Program ........................................ 3

Agency Reorganization...............................................................4

Center Merger ............................................................................4

Related Plans .............................................................................4

Section II - Center Capabilities

Scientific and Technical ........................................................................... 5

Ecological Research and Analysis ............................................ 5

Ecological Monitoring and Data Collection................................. 5

Ecological Database Development ............................................ 5

Laboratory Analysis..................................................................... 5

Ecological Analysis Using Spatial Data....................................... 6

Accessing Ecological Data Over the World Wide Web ............... 6

Long-term Monitoring Using Aerial Photography .......................... 6

Scientific and Technical Report Production ................................. 6

Ecological Analysis Using Remote Sensing ................................ 6

Resource Management and Decision Support ............................. 6

GIS Training ................................................................................ 7

Infrastructure ............................................................................................ 7

Environmental Management Technical Center ............................. 7

Field Stations .............................................................................. 7

Center Organization ................................................................................. 8

Section III - Process for Conducting Science

Strategic Planning.................................................................................... 9

Involving Shareholders ............................................................................. 9

Collaboration ............................................................................................ 9

Partnerships ............................................................................................ 9

Advisory Bodies ..................................................................................... 10

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers .................................................. 10

Upper Mississippi River Basin Association ............................... 10

Environmental Management Program

 Coordinating Committee .................................................... 10

Contents

v
Long Term Resource Monitoring Program

 Analysis Team ................................................................... 11

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ................................................. 11

Federal and State Partner Missions ....................................................... 11

Section IV - Implementation Objectives for the Period 1998-2002

Identifying and Prioritizing Management Information Needs .................. 13

Identification Process .............................................................. 13

Partner Needs and Expectations ............................................. 13

Reporting Performance ........................................................................... 14

Annual Performance Plan.......................................................... 14

Annual Performance Report ...................................................... 14

Objectives .............................................................................................. 14

Support to the Environmental Management Program ............................. 14

Long Term Resource Monitoring and Computerized

 Inventory and Analysis Program Objectives ....................... 14

Support to the Department of the Army .................................................. 21

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers .................................................. 21

Support to the Department of the Interior ............................................... 21

National Park Service ............................................................... 21

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service .................................................. 21

U.S. Geological Survey ............................................................. 22

Support to the U.S. Department of Agriculture ....................................... 22

Natural Resources Conservation Service .................................. 22

Support to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ........................... 23

Section V - Promoting Quality Science

Peer Review ........................................................................................... 24

Study Planning and Approval Process ................................................... 24

Monitoring and Spatial Data Processing ................................................ 24

Evaluating Performance.......................................................................... 24

Rewarding Performance ......................................................................... 25

Assessing Internal and External Environments ...................................... 26

Internal Environment ................................................................. 26

External Environment ................................................................ 27

Aligning Center Activities ....................................................................... 28

Section VI - Implementation Strategies

Administrative Support ........................................................................... 29

Basic Infrastructure ............................................................................... 29

Plan Implementation............................................................................... 29

Summary ............................................................................................... 29

Appendix A - Recommended Long Term Resource Monitoring

Program Work Activity Process ............................................... 30

Appendix B - Implementation Strategies ........................................... 31

vi
1

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

Background

The Environmental Management Technical Center (Center) located in Onalaska, Wisconsin, is a U. S.

Geological Survey (USGS) science center. The Center was established in 1988 as an office of the U. S.

Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), specifically in

response to the Water Resources Act of 1986 (Public

Law 99-662). In this legislation, Congress recognized

the Upper Mississippi River System (UMRS) as a nationally significant ecosystem and a nationally significant commercial navigation system. Congress defined the UMRS as the commercially navigable portions of the Mississippi River north of

Cairo, Illinois, and the Minnesota, Black,

Saint Croix, Illinois, and Kaskaskia Rivers. The act authorized a series of elements known as the Upper Mississippi

River System Environmental Management Program (EMP) and provided funding through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) budget process.

Key elements of the EMP include the

Long Term Resource Monitoring Program (Monitoring Program), the Computerized Inventory and Analysis System

(Information Management), and the

Habitat Rehabilitation and Enhancement

Program (Habitat Program). Whereas the

Corps was assigned responsibility for overall program

management and for implementing the Habitat Program, Congress clearly indicated (through legislative

history, authorizing language, and the recommendations in the Master Plan) that the Monitoring and Information Management elements be implemented by

the Department of the Interior (DOI). These roles are

spelled out in a memorandum of understanding between the two departments.

The functional roles and spatial scope of the Center have evolved and expanded since establishment.

The Center’s role in the DOI changed as biological

science and research responsibilities were consolidated

under one departmental organization. The spatial

scope of the Center’s applied river science is expandSection I - Introduction

ing in response to USGS authorizations and programs

that support watershed science. Although not supported through the Monitoring Program, this externally funded work appropriately links the Center’s focus on the river to the influences of the river watershed.

Purpose

The purpose of this strategic plan is to describe to

the management partners, the scientific community,

and the general public, the strategic direction the Center will follow during the period 1998 through 2002.

This plan includes information on the following:

• Center mission, vision, and guiding principles

• Center goals and 5-year objectives

• Science capabilities

• Means to promote quality science

• Processes for conducting science

• Performance measures

• Forces that may influence success

The format of this plan is consistent with the planning guidance of the USGS and the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993. The content of this

plan will be reviewed periodically and adjusted or

supplemented as necessary to reflect a 5-year planning horizon.

The Environmental Management Technical Center.
2

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

Mission

The mission of the Center is

to provide information needed to

support sound management of

the Mississippi River.

The Center is the only organization in the United States conducting long-term resource monitoring activities using consistent

sampling protocols over geographically broad reaches of the

Mississippi River. It is also the

only organization serving as a

clearinghouse for biological,

physical, and chemical data concerning the Upper Mississippi

River.

The Center has established a

solid scientific reputation that has

led to a growing demand for its

research and analysis capabilities. The Center’s

geospatial technologies, mapping, and analysis capabilities are increasingly sought by DOI land management agencies and other government agencies having

responsibilities within and beyond the UMRS. The

Center’s automation support and information transfer

capabilities have been sought to support USGS National Biological Information Infrastructure efforts.

Vision

Our vision is to be recognized as a “Center of Excellence” in large river sciences—supporting natural

resource management activities on the nation’s largest floodplain river.

Guiding Principles

In fulfilling its mission, the Center

1. recognizes the Congressionally authorized Upper

Mississippi River Environmental Management Program as the primary focus of Center activities;

2. shares the common U.S. Geological Survey goal

of providing the nation with reliable, impartial information to describe and understand the Earth;

3. understands that sound river management requires accurate, timely, and unbiased information;

4. recognizes that establishing partnerships with

other research and management agencies is critical to achieving Center objectives;

5. works to ensure that science activities remain relevant to management questions; and

6. strives for excellence in its research, monitoring,

spatial analysis, and information sharing activities

through internal quality control and external peer

review.

Congress has recognized the Upper Mississippi River System as a nationally significant ecosystem.

Controlled growth for the Center, fostering high

quality and relevant scientific research on the Mississippi River, will enhance our contribution to natural

resource management and society. New programs will

build upon, improve, or complement the Center’s basic legislative mission.

The Center is the only organization

in the United States conducting

long-term resource monitoring

activities using consistent sampling

protocols over geographically broad

reaches of the Mississippi River.
3

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

Center Goals

The Center has established six goals in support of

its mission. These goals closely match those of the

authorizing legislation, the Long Term Resource

Monitoring Program Operating Plan, and those of the

USGS. The goals are

1. Develop a better understanding of the

ecology of large rivers

2. Monitor resource change

3. Support the planning, implementation, and

evaluation of management actions

4. Facilitate the integration of natural resource

science throughout the Upper Mississippi

River Basin

5. Support natural resource management and

science through geospatial technologies and

analysis

6. Support decision making through sound data

management and timely information sharing

Historical Foundations

Environmental Management Program

The Center and its six field station offices employ a variety of scientific and technical skills to help

create the information needed to assess the long-term

status and trends of the UMRS and to help resolve

river resource management conflicts. The

Center concentrates on scientific approaches to producing information, recognizes the necessity to serve management

information needs, and understands that interagency partnerships can achieve more

than a single agency can acting independently.

The Monitoring Program has influenced the design of Center and field station infrastructure and many of the Center’s

functional roles. The Monitoring Program

will remain the Center’s primary emphasis. The existing authorizing language of

the Monitoring Program, however, limits

Monitoring Program involvement in large

river science in two ways. First, by defining its spatial scope as including only the

floodplains and channels of six navigable rivers within

the UMRS, important river monitoring and research

activities outside of the floodplain cannot be accomplished under the Monitoring Program. Second, the

primary activity of the Monitoring Program has been

defined as long-term resource monitoring, thereby limiting the ability of the Center to conduct valuable applied research in response to specific management

needs.

To address these limitations, the Center has employed several strategies to ensure information gathering, analysis, and reporting activities more fully meet

management agency objectives. For instance, to

broaden the spatial scale of the Program’s science information, watershed and landscape initiatives have

been pursued with competitive external funding, additional personnel, and cooperative programs. Additional scientific analysis and applied research capabilities are being pursued through a merger with another nearby USGS Science Center and through a variety of cooperative university and other agency programs. The Center is encouraging management agencies such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the U.S. Army Corps

of Engineers (Corps), and others to place personnel at

Habitat improvement projects are developed to enhance biological resources.
4

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

Congress has recognized the Upper Mississippi River System as a nationally

significant commercial navigation system.

the Center. On-site representatives coordinate, integrate, and leverage their management information

needs with the Center’s capabilities to enhance agency

objectives. In this role, the Center serves as a platform to integrate multiagency science information

needs within the basin.

Agency Reorganization

In 1993, Secretary of the Interior Babbitt combined the biological science resources of several Department of the Interior bureaus, including the U. S.

Fish and Wildlife Service, into the National Biological Survey (Survey was later changed to Service). This

reorganization included the Center and was intended,

in part, to enhance the objectivity of science within

the Department. It also broadened, with additional

funding, the spatial scope of studies that could be undertaken by the Center.

In October 1996, a merger with the U.S. Geological Survey resulted in the National Biological Service

becoming the Biological Resources Division (BRD)

of the USGS. The merger provides for increasing

interactions in the biological sciences with existing

USGS divisions (Water Resources, Geology, and Mapping). From a Center perspective, the merger helps

emphasize objective and timely science. The merger

also provides considerable opportunities for collaborative efforts over broader spatial scales and for the

leveraging of agency resources,

thereby enhancing EMP activities.

Center Merger

The Environmental Management Technical Center and the

Upper Mississippi Science Center will be administratively

merged in the near future.

These USGS science centers

are located close to each other

and have missions that, while

different, are complimentary in

some areas. A merger, therefore, offers opportunities to

streamline management support

functions and leverage scientific and technical capabilities to give maximum support to customers and other interested parties. It also

provides the opportunity for the USGS to provide financial resources in support of the Center mission and

Mississippi River management agencies information

needs. To facilitate an orderly merger, a Merger Transition Plan is needed to address key issues regarding

funding, partner information needs, organization, core

scientific and technical capabilities, space requirements, and the leveraging of staff skills and capabilities. The plan should address short- (1 year), mid-

(2–4 years) and long-term (beyond 4 years) planning

horizons.

Related Plans

The national USGS and BRD Strategic and Implementation plans provide important guidance for conducting scientific studies at all 17 USGS science centers. Guidance includes activities related to performance measures and indicators, research planning, and

promotion of quality scientific research through peer

review, competition, and a suitable awards program.

Center agreement and compliance with this guidance

(which has been incorporated into a series of Center

standard operating procedures) is a prerequisite to

implementation of this plan. . In addition, the Monitoring Program’s original operating plan provides important guidance on process, procedures, and

emphasis.
5

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

Section II - Center Capabilities

The Center employs scientific and technical professionals

with expertise in

• applied river ecology to describe ecosystems, collect

data, analyze trends, forecast conditions, evaluate habitat

restoration and recommend management alternatives;

• geospatial technologies to build spatial databases, develop land cover/land use maps, conduct landscape analysis and modeling, provide Geographic Information System

(GIS) training, and perform cartographic services; and

• data and information management to provide quality control and public access to data, develop decision-support tools, and produce scientific and technical reports.

Scientific and Technical

Ecological Research and Analysis

The Center employs scientists in the physical, biological,

and chemical sciences to conduct data collection, analysis, and

research on a wide range of ecological topics such as basic and

applied research on species, populations, and ecosystems. They

develop predictive studies and models; collect data on longterm status and trends of important plants, animals, and ecosystems; provide technical assistance; and carry out ecological

assessments.

Ecological Monitoring and Data Collection

Center staff members oversee the collection of a variety of

environmental data through six strategically located field stations operated in cooperation with the states of Illinois, Iowa,

Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin. These field stations are

responsible for annual monitoring and analysis activities relating to fish, water quality, aquatic vegetation, and

macroinvertebrates.

Ecological Database Development

Center and field station staff have developed a large array

of ecological databases relating to fish, water quality, macroinvertebrates, vegetation, water levels and flows, sediments,

and land cover and land use. Data collected from aerial photos

and other base map manuscripts are digitized for inclusion in

the master database for preservation, display, and subsequent

evaluation. Bathymetric data are developed using land-based

Scientific and Technical

Specialties

botany

cartography

computer science

contract administration

database management

digitial image processing

ecology

entomology

fish biology

forestry

geography

graphic design

hydrology

information transfer

laboratory analysis

landscape ecology

limnology

network administration

photo interpretation

publication management

technical editing

telecommunications

web technology

wildlife biology

and hydrographic surveying equipment.

Metadata (data about the data) has been developed which explains the nature of each

database.

Laboratory Analysis

The Center operates analytical and bio-
6

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

logical laboratories. The analytical laboratory uses

state-of-the-art equipment, including atomic absorption and ion chromatography. Analyses are conducted

using a high level of automation. The biological laboratory is used for enumeration, aging, and identification of fish, benthic macroinvertebrates, and aquatic

and terrestrial plant species.

Ecological Analysis Using Spatial Data

Center staff members use ARC/INFO GIS software to process and analyze spatial data. Surfacing

and modeling are performed using custom interfaces

using a suite of software tools. ArcView software is

also used by Center and field station staff for data visualization.

Accessing Ecological Data Over the World Wide Web

The Center established a World Wide Web site in

November 1993 (http//www.emtc.usgs.gov) and provides free access to data and information about the

UMRS and related areas in seven adjoining Midwestern states. This Web site offers more than 8,200 files

on fish, vegetation, macroinvertebrates, water quality, water levels, aerial photography, satellite imagery, scientific publications, and geographic information system data.

The Web site has been visited by individuals from

all 50 states and more than 70 foreign countries. Almost 3 million visits have been recorded since May

1995 and more than 1 million visits were recorded

during calendar year 1997.

Long-term Monitoring Using Aerial Photography

Annual aerial photo missions are undertaken using sophisticated flight planning software and a highresolution camera (the camera is shared and installed

in a USFWS [Region 3] airplane). Center and field

station staff members perform detailed photo interpretation and transfer the resultant data into a GIS.

These data are analyzed to determine plant species

abundance, detecting changes and patterns in land

cover and land use, and in mapping aquatic habitat

changes over time.

Scientific and Technical Report Production

The Center has extensive report production capabilities. Technical editors support researchers, scientists, and technical staff in writing a variety of products. Products include technical reports, articles for

peer-reviewed journals, project status reports, popular articles, training manuals, standard operating procedures, and outreach documents such as press releases, fact sheets, and brochures. The Center also

provides desktop publishing, graphic,

photographic, and printing support to

staff and partners.

Ecological Analysis Using Remote

Sensing

Satellite images are processed using

ERDAS software (a commercial image processing software) to produce

classified scenes of land cover for the

floodplain of the UMRS. Landsat

Thematic Mapper, Landsat Multispectral Scanner, SPOT (a French satellite system), and Advanced Very

High Resolution Radiometer

(AVHRR) data are used in trend

analysis and change detection.

Automation support staff ensure that Center personnel have access to

dependable computing equipment and software.
7

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

Resource Management and Decision Support

Center staff members support managing agency

efforts through the production of custom cartographic

products including maps, charts, posters, and slides.

Strict quality assurance/quality control procedures are

adhered to in product development.

GIS Training

Training manuals and structured courses have been

developed by Center staff members in the use of ARC/

INFO and ArcView GIS software. Classes are conducted in the Center’s on-site training and meeting

facilities. Staff experts also provide training in the

use and application of the state-of-the-art hardware

and software decision-support tools.

Infrastructure

Environmental Management Technical Center

The Center occupies 22,000 ft2

 of office, laboratory, conference, and shop space and 4,800 ft2

 of storage space in a General Services Administration leased

facility in Onalaska, Wisconsin.

The Center has a well-equipped laboratory and

the necessary equipment (hydrolabs, autoanalyzer,

etc.) to collect and analyze a variety of field data.

Center resources provide scientists with tools to perform inventory and monitoring activities,

multitemporal and multispatial scale research, and to

assess status and trends using remote sensing, geographic information systems, and global positioning

systems (GPS). Automation equipment includes Unix

file servers, workstations, and personal computers interconnected by a local area network with access to

the Internet. In addition, sophisticated digitizing, scanning, duplicating, and plotting equipment enhance

Center research capabilities. A variety of image processing and GIS software packages are available to

Center researchers.

The Center uses a positioning system, an

innerspace transducer, computer software, and a chart

recorder to collect hydrosurvey field data. The data

are edited and translated into GIS coverages using the

latest in computer software. Positioning for sampling

sites has become an important part of most Center studies and sophisticated equipment is used to perform

real time positioning.

The Center has the necessary equipment to meet

the various field conditions found during open-water,

freeze-up, and iced-over conditions on a large river.

For the open-water season, conventional or specialty

boats are available for regular open-water and

vegetation sampling, hydrosurveys, and electrofishing.

For sampling during iced-over conditions, snowmobiles and all-terrain vehicles are available.

Field Stations

Six cooperative state owned and operated field

stations (Lake City, Minnesota; Onalaska, Wisconsin;

Bellevue, Iowa; Alton and Havana, Illinois; and Cape

Girardeau, Missouri) have been established for field

data collection, analysis, quality assurance, and applied research.

The Mississippi and Illinois Rivers can be separated into distinct river reaches based upon common

floodplain geomorphic structure. The field stations

that collect the Monitoring Program biological, chemiCenter and Field Station Locations
8

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

Environmental Management Technical Center Organizational Structure

EMTC

Center

Director

Geospatial

Technologies

Division

Program

Operations

Division

Multiagency

Science Integration

Team

Applied

River Science

Division

LTRMP

Analysis

Team*

International

Science Review

Committee

Physical

Science

Field

Station

Integration

Biological

Science

Landscape/

Habitat

Analysis

Decision

Support

Apps

Geospatial

Apps &

Mapping

Carto

Services &

Products

RS Photo

Interpretation

HR and

Facility

Management

Budget

Finance

Contracting

Info Services

Automation

Support

Reports,

Graphics &

Outreach

cal, and physical data are located on these river

reaches. Three field stations are in the upper impounded reach of the UMRS, one within the lower

impounded reach, one in the impounded lower Illinois River, and one in the Open River reach.

A field station team leader is responsible for the

overall operation, management, and quality assurance/

quality control (QA/QC) of station activities. A crew

leader is responsible for each data collection crew,

accuracy of data collected, and the proper transcription of raw data to a digital format. Field station staff

provide input on sampling methods and protocols,

support data management and transfer, and day-to-day

support to monitoring activities.

Each field station has similar complements of staff

and equipment. Between five and seven permanent

staff members including a Team Leader, component

Specialists (Water Quality, Fisheries, and Vegetation),

and several technicians comprise the team. Temporary staff are added as needed.

Equipment at field stations consists of several

boats designed for various types of sampling during

all seasons (i.e., an electrofishing boat, airboat,

hovercraft, canoes, and various flat-bottomed boats

and motors), various types of nets and seines, and electronic equipment including water quality meters and

GPS. In addition, office equipment (computers, printers, copy and fax machines, etc.) sufficient to operate

a typical field office is available.

Center Organization

The Center is structured around its core scientific

capabilities and strengths through the Applied River

Science, Geospatial Technologies, and Program Operations Divisions as shown below. The Center’s organization includes four external advisory committees

that perform science review, agency science integration, programmatic review, and coordination of agency

information needs.

*The Analysis Team’s relationship to the EMTC

and the EMP-CC is defined in a Team Charter.

Federal/State

Management Review

Committee

Lake

City, MN

Onalaska,

WI

Bellevue,

IA

Alton,

IL

Havana,

IL

Cape G.

MO
9

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

Section III - Process for Conducting Science

Strategic Planning

The Center considers strategic planning but one

part of the planning process. Planning is not a static

or occasional event, but rather a dynamic and inclusive process that forms the basis for the Center’s shortand long-term activities. Three planning practices are

critical to the Center’s success, (1) involving shareholders; (2) assessing the internal and external environment; and, (3) aligning Center activities, core processes, and resources to support agency mission-related outcomes. As a nonadvocacy biological science

and technology center, the Center works to provide

data and information to resource managers, decision

makers, and civil authorities in support of their missions.

To meet the Center’s legislative goals and objectives, a process of comprehensive science planning

has been established. The process includes extensive

communication for identifying and prioritizing management information needs. Also, regular, formal

meetings are held with partners to discuss and reach

consensus on priorities. A series of planning documents record decisions, define specific tasks and products, estimate costs, and set work schedules.

Involving Shareholders

Management of the Upper Mississippi River is

the responsibility of several independent Federal and

state agencies. Although communication among these

various agencies and groups has been extensive, few

actual collaborative programs that share objectives,

resources, and results have been established.

The Center focuses on particular geographic ecosystems, and its scientific and technical strengths derive from a breadth of disciplines rather than a focused strength on any one discipline. Therefore, the

Center relies to a great degree on cooperative relationships with a variety of scientific institutions, universities, and other agencies to address complex natural resource issues. Much of the applied research conducted by the Center is done in collaboration with scientists from a variety of institutions. This allows the

Center to assemble the best and most relevant expertise needed for any given issue and greatly leverages

the Center’s available resources.

Partnerships

Partnerships are a special emphasis of the Center

mainly because the Center and

its six field stations were established in response to specific

legislative mandates and client

needs. These mandates and

needs overlap a large geographic area involving several

state, Federal, and local jurisdictional entities and involve a

variety of private and

nonagency public interest

groups. This has produced a rich

“partnering” tradition and established a fundamental way of

conducting the Center’s day-today business as well as providing a unique communication

link to partner agencies.

Staff members are trained in the use of a wide variety of equipment.
10

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

The Center supports river scientists, natural resource managers, and decision makers

by

• conducting data collection, analysis,

research, and modeling regarding

floodplain elevation, water quality,

fishes, sedimentation, and invertebrates;

• investigating linkages between geomorphic and biological processes and

the ecology of large rivers;

• determining effects of water levels

and flows on the River ecosystem;

• studying effects of navigation on selected River components and processes;

• investigating processes affecting

aquatic vegetation changes;

• using aerial photography and satellite imagery to gather land cover and

land use data;

• constructing multi scale, basin-wide

databases of land cover, ownership,

land management status, and species

distribution;

• using data and analytical tools for

decision support efforts;

• developing databases and user interfaces for emergency response activities;

• conducting training courses in GIS

applications, photo interpretation,

Internet access, and computer applications; and

• planning, designing, and testing innovative ecosystem management

techniques for maintaining and restoring large river ecosystems.

Partner Support Activities

Advisory Bodies

Consensus building has always been and continues to be critical to successful Monitoring Program

implementation. The Upper Mississippi region has a

rich tradition of interagency partnerships, and many

of the long-standing interagency organizations have

provided convenient forums for coordination.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

The Mississippi Valley Division has overall program management responsibility for the EMP and receives policy guidance from the Headquarters office

of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The St. Paul,

Rock Island, and St. Louis Districts are responsible

for the planning, design, construction, and monitoring of habitat projects within their respective UMRS

Districts.

Upper Mississippi River Basin Association

The Basin Association, as directed by Congressional legislation, provides policy oversight of the

EMP and ensures EMP coordination with basin issues. Members include the states of Illinois, Iowa,

Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin. Federal advisory members include the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S.

Geological Survey, the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, the U.S. Department of Transportation, and

the Natural Resources Conservation Service.

Each state conservation agency is actively involved in the identification, selection, planning, and

design of habitat projects within its jurisdiction. They

often participate in the planning of projects in adjoining states. Each state funds 25% of the cost of any

project within its borders not on land managed as a

national refuge. Upon completion of construction, the

respective state is responsible for 100% of the operation and maintenance of projects on lands that it manages. Each state, by cooperative agreement and funds

transfer, operate a Monitoring Program field station.

Environmental Management Program Coordinating

Committee

For the specific purpose of providing interagency

coordination of various elements of EMP implementation, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers established
11

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

the EMP Coordinating Committee (EMP-CC) in 1987.

The EMP-CC is the primary consultative body used

to seek consensus on EMP budgetary and policy issues. Members include the same states and agencies

previously listed for the Basin Association.

Long Term Resource Monitoring Program Analysis Team

To provide technical advise on implementing the

Monitoring Program (that combines the authorized

monitoring and computerized information and analysis system elements of the EMP), an interagency committee called the Analysis Team was formed by the

Center. This team presently works with the Center on

Monitoring Program goals and objectives, setting priorities, defining products, and reviewing progress.

Members include the states of Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin, the U.S. Army Corps

of Engineers, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the

U.S. Geological Survey, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the Natural Resources Conservation Service. This team will soon be merged with the

EMP-CC and have a formal charter defining roles and

responsibilities.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

The Region 3 office has lead USFWS responsibility for participating in the planning and design of

habitat projects both on and off national

wildlife refuge lands. The USFWS is

also responsible for operation and

maintenance of projects on lands it

manages and for satisfying requirements of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act with respect to all habitat

projects.

Federal and State Partner Missions

Each of our primary Federal and state

partners have different but related missions within the UMRS. The following

paragraphs summarize their responsibilities within the UMRS:

• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - constructs, operates, and maintains flood control and river and harbor facilities and installations. Environmental restoration is an emerging activity.

• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - conserves, protects

and enhances fish and wildlife and their habitats for the

continuing benefit of the American people.

• The National Park Service - is responsible for preserving unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and

values of the National Park System for the enjoyment,

education, and inspiration of this and future generations.

• The U.S. Geological Survey - provides the Nation

with reliable, impartial information to describe and understand the Earth.

• The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - protects human health and safeguards the natural environment — air, water, and land — upon which life depends.

• The Natural Resources Conservation Service - provides leadership in a partnership effort to help people conserve, improve, and sustain our natural resources and

environment.

• The Iowa Department of Natural Resources - manages, protects, conserves, and develops Iowa’s natural

resources in cooperation with other public and private organizations and individuals.

• The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources

- works with the people of Minnesota to manage the state’s

diverse natural resources for a sustainable quality of life.

Sediment sampling activities.
12

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

• The Missouri Department of Conservation - protects

and manages the fish, forest, and wildlife resources of

the state; serves the public and facilitates their participation in resource management activities; provides opportunity for all citizens to use enjoy, and learn about fish,

forest, and wildlife resources.

• The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources -

to protect and enhance Wisconsin’s natural resources; to

Boating opportunities abound within the Upper Mississippi River System.

provide a clean and abundant out-of-doors and a full range

of outdoor recreational experiences; and to remember the

future and those who will follow us.

• The Illinois Department of Natural Resources - promotes an appreciation of the state’s natural resources and

works to protect and manage those resources to ensure

a high quality of life for present and future generations.
13

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

Section IV - Implementation Objectives for the Period 1998-2002

Identifying and Prioritizing Management

Information Needs

Identification Process

The scientific and technological activities of the

Center will continue to be influenced by the informational needs and expectations of the management

agencies along the Mississippi River. The process of

basing Center science on management needs began

during the early planning phase of the Monitoring Program. Three committees made up of scientists and

management agency staff collaboratively wrote plans

for monitoring Mississippi River natural resources.

They identified and prioritized resource problems and

recommended a computer system for development of

geographic information system capabilities and to assist in analyzing, managing, and distributing the resulting data.

Recommended procedures for identifying management information needs related to the EMP involves participation by two multiagency committees,

the Monitoring Program Analysis Team and the Environmental Management Program Coordinating Committee (EMP-CC). The Analysis Team is responsible

for compiling the many management agency

needs that relate to the Mississippi River and

presenting collaboratively developed information needs and priorities to Center scientists. The EMP-CC may either concur with

the stated information needs or recommend

modifications. These two committees will

soon be merged with a formal charter defining roles and responsibilities. The recommended work activity process and general

roles of the different advisory committees

and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is

provided in Appendix A.

Partner Needs and Expectations

Periodically, the Center and the Analysis Team initiate a process by which UMRS

resource agencies define and prioritize their

resource management informational needs.

The individual identified needs were recently summarized by the Analysis Team into the following overall management information themes:

1. Describe and explain the effects of navigation and agricultural development, operation, and maintenance,

on the physical and biological habitat in the UMRS.

2. Describe and explain how the hydrology and geomorphology of the UMRS has changed and how those

changes have affected biological habitat and water

quality.

3. Describe species abundance and distribution both spatially and temporally.

4. Describe how different ecosystem components interact and how they have been affected by physical,

chemical, and biological changes in the UMRS.

5. Describe future conditions under different management

scenarios including the current system.

6. Provide the scientific support needed to complete a

habitat needs assessment for the UMRS.

These management information themes, which include previously identified priority needs, Upper Mississippi River Master Plan Recommendations, and

items specified in existing memorandums of agreement, formed the basis for identifying the EMP objectives listed in this plan.

Quality assurance/quality control activities in support of

Vegetation mapping.
14

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

The scientific and technological activities of the Center will

continue to be influenced by the informational needs

and expectations of the management agencies

along the Mississippi River.

Reporting Performance

Several key documents are linked to and complement this strategic plan. These documents include the

Annual Performance Plan and the Annual Performance

Report.

Annual Performance Plan

Annual performance plans will be directly linked

to this strategic plan. The goals and objectives in this

strategic plan set the framework for developing annual performance plans. These performance plans are

incorporated as abreviated study plans in the USGS

Science Information System (SIS) and include quantifiable, and measurable performance objectives to be

achieved in a given fiscal year. The purpose of the

SIS is to provide a comprehensive scientific information database comprising summary documentation of

the objectives, location, funding amount and source,

project description, approach, anticipated application

of research, products, duration, progress, and results

of USGS scientific and technical efforts.

Annual Performance Report

Within four months after the close of each fiscal

year, the Center submits to the Corps and other Program Partners a report on program performance for

the fiscal year just ended. This report will review the

Center’s success in achieving the performance goals

for that fiscal year. Where the annual goals have been

achieved, the underlying assumptions and strategies

will be examined to ensure that these goals and associated performance measures have continued applicability. If any of the performance goals are not met,

the Center will conduct an analysis of why they were

not met and what actions are necessary to meet these

goals in the future. If the analysis should indicate that

the performance goal is impractical or not feasible,

the performance report will document the reasons and

recommend further action.

Objectives

The following objectives are organized by major

program support area and subdivided by Center goal

within each program area. The identified objectives

The goals and objectives in this

strategic plan set the framework for

developing annual performance plans.

are based on information contained in Public Law 99-

662, the Long Term Resource Monitoring Program

Operating Plan, UMRS Partner expectations, the Bureau Information Needs (BIN) process, and specific

priority requests from client agencies.

The stated objectives vary with respect to magnitude of effort necessary, specificity of implementation requirements, and resulting products. The objectives in this plan, therefore, merely set the framework

for developing specific plans of study (scopes of work)

for incorporating into the USGS SIS. The scopes of

work and SIS will include specific implementation information including products, research questions, time

frames, and budgets.

Support to the Environmental Management

Program

Long Term Resource Monitoring and Computerized Inventory and Analysis Program Objectives

Goal 1 Objectives (Develop a better understanding of the ecology of large rivers)

(L01) Quantify the temporal and spatial dynamics of

aquatic vegetation, with emphasis on plant response
15

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

to the hydrologic regime, sediment, bathymetry, and

water quality (nutrients and suspended material), and

the effects of plants on invertebrates, fishes, birds,

and other species.

Aquatic vegetation is vital to the ecological quality of

UMRS backwaters. This objective addresses the need to

explain how aquatic vegetation interacts with physical,

chemical, and biological variables. Products developed

under this objective include evaluations of monitoring data,

tests (laboratory and field) of hypotheses that relate

aquatic vegetation to other factors, and models to assist

with the design of future management actions intended to

modify aquatic abundance and species composition of the

aquatic plant community.

(L02) Quantify the ecology and limnology of off-channel areas, with emphasis on predicting and quantifying winter conditions and their linkage to the abundance

and distribution of selected fish populations.

Off-channel areas in the UMRS provide important

aquatic habitat and are a focal point of ecological functions (and restoration efforts) within the system. This objective addresses the need to promote more effective management within these areas by developing a clearer understanding of their limnological and ecological relations.

Work under this objective began by addressing a priority

management issue (availability of over-wintering habitat)

that requires fundamental information on physical-chemical limnology and fisheries biology. Products developed

under this objective include large- and small-scale field assessments and predictive models of habitat availability. We

will link winter habitat availability and suitability both to overwinter survival and observed changes in fish populations

over 5–10 years .

(L03) Initiate an assessment of the ecological importance of the annual flood pulse to aquatic and terrestrial productivity and diversity.

The annual flood pulse in a given river reach affects

sediment and nutrient fluxes, energy cycles, fish spawning, and the suitability of habitat conditions for many aquatic

and terrestrial species. This objective addresses the need

to quantify selected relations between the flood pulse and

river habitats, species, and ecological processes, and to

describe how the flood pulse in different UMRS reaches

has been modified by navigation and agricultural development. Products developed under this objective include

evaluations of historical changes in flood pulse characteristics, analyses of flood zone extent and duration, and models of selected relations between the flood pulse and species abundance and community diversity. The models will

be designed to help forecast ecological benefits of restoring floodplain connectivity in selected river reaches.

More and more cities are recognizing the importance of the river to their local economies.
16

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

Converting data to electronic format for a geographic information system.

LTRMP portable display used at meetings, conferences,

and symposia.

(L04) Apply forest succession and dynamic bird

models to floodplain lands managed by the U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to identify optimal timber-cutting strategies for

vegetation diversity and bird habitat suitability.

The size, fragmentation, community composition, and

age structure of UMRS forests affect their value as habitat

for migrating birds. This objective addresses the need to

quantify the relations between selected forest features and

bird habitat suitability. Products developed under this

objective include models of causal relationships to assist

the development of effective timber cutting strategies

within the UMRS floodplains.

(L05) Develop a model to predict how water quality,

hydrologic regime and substrate factors control the

abundance and distribution of mayflies and fingernail

clams.

Mayflies and fingernail clams are important, and in

some cases critical, food items for river fish and migrating

waterfowl. This objective addresses the need to quantify

relations between physical water and substrate variables

and invertebrate populations. Products developed under

this objective include analyses that document the ranges of

water and substrate conditions necessary to support high

densities of invertebrates, and predictive models that can

be used to design habitat projects or other management

strategies to sustain invertebrate populations at levels

required by fish, migrating waterfowl, and other species.

(L06) Quantify morphometric and limnological effects

associated with changes in bathymetry, elevation,

impoundment, levee construction, island loss and

channel training structures and quantify

the ecological effects of these changes.

 The morphometry of the UMRS floodplains

has changed in response to a variety of human

activities, especially channel training, impoundment, and levee construction. Morphometry is fundamental to the system’s

ecological structures and functions. Changes

in morphometry over time have altered the

system’s habitats, species, and ecological

processes. This objective addresses the need

to quantify basic physical changes that have

taken place over time at several spatial scales

and to estimate their ecological consequences. Products developed under this

objective include change maps, frequently at

decadal intervals; tabulations of physical

changes at different points in time; and reports

on ecological consequences.

(L07) Forecast future morphometric and

ecological conditions within the UMRS.

Some changes in the morphometric condition of

UMRS floodplains are ongoing and expected to continue.

Forecasts of some of the changes are possible, and are

already under way as part of the Navigation Feasibility

Study, the Adaptive Environmental Assessment Exercise, and the River Summit efforts. Forecasts are

especially valuable to establish long-term ecological

objectives for the system. This objective addresses the

need for Monitoring Program information to be used in

developing the most scientifically-based forecasts

possible. Monitoring Program forecasting work will be

based on internal activities described under the other

objectives and will continue to build on the work of

external studies as they come to completion. Specific

work will address future trends associated with pool aging
17

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

Technical reports provide a proven method for sharing scientific

accomplishments.

(sediment build up, continued loss of bathymetric diversity,

estimates of time to reach pool sediment equilibrium).

Habitat suitability models for species or guilds will be used

to estimate how forecasted physical changes will affect

plants and animals. Products developed under this

objective include tabular forecasts, spatial maps, and

reports of likely associated impacts to species or guilds.

(L08) Assemble and evaluate existing nutrient, sediment, and flow data for mainstem and tributaries of the

UMRS to develop loading estimates and assess

sources, sinks, transports, and transformations in the

UMR floodplain.

Constituent and flow data are required to quantitatively evaluate or model the movement, fate, and effects of

material delivered from the UMRS drainage basin into the

stream network. Stream flow and concentrations of

nutrients and suspended sediment in the mainstem and

tributaries of the UMRS are measured by several federal

and state agencies at a large number of locations. This

objective addresses the need to assemble and evaluate

the flow, nutrient, and suspended sediment data from

these differing sources. The data are and will continue to

be used to estimate material transport (loads) to the River

mainstem from tributaries and at monitoring points on the

main channel. An important aspect of this objective is that

the compiled data (constituents and flows) and loading

estimates be made available in a consistent, usable, and

documented form.

(L09) Develop a model that evaluates the

relative nutrient and sediment contributions to the UMR from major tributaries

and relates these to subbasin landscape

conditions.

Ecological conditions in the UMRS river

floodplains are greatly dependent on the

amount and timing of water, sediment, and

nutrient inputs from mainstem tributaries.

This objective addresses the need to understand how tributary contributions are controlled by geologic, landscape, and land use

features within each basin. Analysis will be

in detail on selected subbasins and on a

coarser scale on all subbasins. Products

developed under this objective include spatial analyses of the relationships between selected basin features and material loading,

and models of load reductions that could be

achieved if selected land management practices were implemented.

Goal 2 Objectives (Monitor resource change)

(L10) Complete and summarize 5 annual increments of

monitoring data for water quality, fish, vegetation,

invertebrates, and bathymetry.

Annual monitoring of water quality, fish, vegetation,

invertebrates, and bathymetry is a vital function of the

Monitoring Program. The work is accomplished by staff at

the Center and six state-operated field stations. This

objective addresses the need to continue making

consistent, standardized observations of physical-chemical conditions and species across the UMRS through time.

Products developed under this objective include annual

increments of data, annual data summary reports, an

annual state of the river report, and synthesizing

observations into an Ecological Status and Trends Report

of the UMRS after 5 years.

(L11) Analyze existing monitoring data to address longterm and longitudinal trends in limnological conditions

and linkages to riverine biota with emphasis on aquatic

vegetation and selected fish species.

During the initial years of Monitoring Program, the

emphasis was on establishing monitoring methods,

developing data quality control measures, and procedures

for management and reporting. With these functions

operational and a multiyear database established, a

relatively greater proportion of staff time can be allocated to

analyzing the patterns that are becoming apparent in the

databases. This objective addresses the need to evaluate

trends of spatial and temporal relations between the
18

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

Laboratory staff processing field samples.

components being monitored. Products developed under

this objective include trend and correlation analyses,

spatial analysis of individual components, recommendations for improving the effectiveness of the monitoring

program, hypotheses about causal relations that can be

tested in association with objectives L01-L09, and the

monitoring reports listed under L10.

(L12) Estimate sedimentation rates and changes in

bathymetric diversity in off-channel areas of the UMRS.

Within a floodplain reach, varying habitat conditions

(channel gradient, water depth, velocity, fetch) control the

rate at which sediment is deposited and resuspended.

Upland soil erosion and impoundment have contributed to

greater deposition rates in backwaters and impounded

areas immediately above dams. Loss of water depth and

bathymetric diversity in these areas threaten their habitat

suitability for a variety of species. This objective addresses

the need to evaluate the long-term stability of habitat

conditions within the UMRS and to quantify where and how

fast habitat suitability is declining. Products developed

under this objective include selected reach or pool

bathymetric maps, historical change maps, and analysis of

sedimentation rates along fixed transects in impoundments.

(L13) Complete sediment budgets for six key trend

analysis areas.

Sediment loading and transport are among the most

important hydrologic processes that have and will continue

to affect habitat quality within the UMRS. This objective

addresses the need to understand how specific reaches

are impacted by sediment loading, to

compare conditions among different

river reaches, and in combination with

work under L08, L09, and L12, to

estimate how quickly river reaches are

approaching sediment equilibrium.

Products developed under this objective are data sets for each Monitoring

Program trend analysis area that

quantify sediment loadings and outputs

over a 3-year period.

Goal 3 Objectives (Support the

planning, implementation, and

evaluation of management

actions)

(L14) Continue to develop and evaluate alternatives for water level management within impounded reaches

of the UMRS.

Increasingly, river managers are exploring water regulation alternatives to

improve the ecological quality of the UMRS. Ongoing plans

call for testing alternatives at local and navigation pool spatial scales. This objective addresses the need to adequately

plan such experiments to maximize ecological benefits, and

learning, and to evaluate the short- and long- term ecological effects of the experiments. Work done under this objective requires extensive coordination with management

partners. Products developed under this objective include

spatial maps of areas likely to be affected by the experiments, study designs, and pre- and post- project analyses

of floodplain habitats and populations.

(L15) Document, evaluate and model fish passage opportunities and constraints at UMRS locks and dams,

and recommend management alternatives intended to

improve fish passage.

Locks and dams are known to affect fish passage.

However, the magnitude of such impacts at specific locks

and dams on the UMRS, and their consequences to local

or systemic fish populations and communities, with the exception of some specific cases, have not been quantified.

The opportunity for upriver passage of adult migratory fishes

through each UMR dam is being examined under LTRMP.

A report in progress on the subject describes previous fish

mark-recapture and telemetry studies, hydraulic conditions

at UMR dams, and the swimming performance of UMR

fishes. A variety of management alternatives have been

proposed to reduce existing fish passage constraints (e.g.,

modifying locking procedures to enhance fish passage

through locks; modifying gate opening combinations to create more effective passage zones). LTRMP staff will work

with partners to better determine hydraulic constraints at
19

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

Center staff use aerial photography to monitor vegetation.

UMR dams, to design and conduct field experiments to test

the effectiveness of management alternatives, and to develop models to understand the consequences of restricted

movements on UMR fish populations. Products developed

under this objective will include evaluations and predictive

models of fish response to water regulation alternatives,

and potential consequences to river fish populations and

communities.

(L16) Provide data, analyses, and models necessary

to plan and design selected Habitat Rehabilitation and

Enhancement Projects.

A habitat needs assessment for the UMRS will be

conducted over the next 2 years. The needs assessment

will provide guidelines, at several spatial scales, for future

habitat rehabilitation projects. This objective addresses

the need to base the assessment on the most recent and

accurate spatial information available, and a collaborative

consensus on what constitutes acceptable river ecological

health within different floodplain reaches, both now and in

the future. This objective also addresses the need to use

the ecological knowledge being generated by Monitoring

Program research and monitoring activities to set systemic

objectives and design individual habitat projects.

Monitoring Program spatial databases, in a variety of

formats, will be presented for use during the assessment.

The Monitoring Program staff will also work with

management partners and the public to continue to

elaborate a set of criteria to assess river ecological health.

Products developed under this objective include sections

of habitat needs assessment planning documents and

maps and coverages to be used during planning

processes.

(L17) Evaluate the physical and ecological effects of

selected Habitat Rehabilitation and Enhancement

Projects.

 Habitat projects can be considered large scale

experiments that provide the opportunity to learn how

habitats, species, and ecological processes respond to

specific management actions. This objective addresses

the need to design and implement scientific studies

associated with selected habitat projects. The results of

the studies will help to demonstrate which projects are

most successful at achieving individual and systemic

habitat objectives. Products developed under this

objective include comparisons of pre- and post-project

conditions and analysis of the causal mechanisms

involved.

Goal 4 Objectives (Facilitate the integration of

natural resource science throughout the Upper

Mississippi River Basin)

(L18) Facilitate annual, multi-agency science-based

workshops to foster coordinated natural resource management and establish a common set of ecological

goals for the UMRS.

The Environmental Management Program, in addition

to supporting ecological monitoring and habitat rehabilitation, has helped to strengthen communication among different river interests and organizations. Federal and state

agencies and advocacy groups have expressed increasing interest in jointly developing systemic ecological objectives for the UMRS. They have also indicated that such

ecological objectives, based on science, might lead to

greater progress and efficiencies among

the many agencies responsible for river

management. This objective addresses

the need to facilitate continuing discussions intended to establish systemic

UMRS ecological goals and subsequent

clarification of ways by which those goals

can be accomplished. Products developed under this objective include annual

workshops, associated reports, and increased use and understanding of the data

being generated under the Monitoring Program.

Goal 5 Objectives (Support natural

resource management and science

through geospatial technologies

and analysis)

(L19) Establish a geographic information center to serve as a centralized repository and analysis facility for

systemwide spatial data and information.
20

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

Training in the use of monitoring equipment and analyses tools is provided by Center staff to scientists and

resource managers.

Accomplishment of this objective is measured by the

continuous operation of the GIS Center developed under

the provisions of the Water Resources Development Act of

1986 (Public Law 99-662). The Center will continue as a

leader in providing centralized and consistent base mapping and GIS analysis capabilities for several ongoing multipartner activities. Products include completion of the detailed land cover/land use data layers for approximately 75

different areas within the UMRS; production of high quality

cartographic map products (200+ yearly); development of

digital spatial data sets for use by partners (100–300 files

per year); annual spatial data collection, storage, and display (30–50 events); technical support for the analysis and

modeling of Monitoring Program data (75–100 events); and,

conducting training activities in the use of spatial analysis

software and technology (3–6 classes annually).

(L20) Conduct a coordinated remote sensing program

to obtain aerial photography and satellite imagery for

use in monitoring aquatic and terrestrial vegetation patterns and land use within the UMRS.

Work under this objective involves planning and conducting aerial photography missions, cataloging acquired

photographs, and periodically acquiring selected satellite

scenes. Products include five annual collections of aerial

photographs for six key pools and selected areas, systemic

(1300 river miles) aerial photography coverages every five

years (1989, 1994, 1999, 2004), and the acquisition of selected satellite data (average 1–2 scenes per year).

Goal 6 Objectives (Support decision making

through sound data management and timely

information sharing)

L21) Develop and implement a management briefing

and decision support system for the UMRS

Section (e)(1) of Public Law 99-662 (U.S. Congress

1986) authorized, as identified in the Master Plan, “. . .implementation of a long-term resource monitoring program; and

. . .implementation of a computerized inventory and analysis system.” Two major goals outlined in the Master Plan

include (1) develop an information transfer service to provide for identification and transfer of information and technology ... and (2) develop a management briefing system

to provide support information to resource management

entities of the UMRS. Information transfer and management briefing are currently referred to as a “decision support system” that involves providing timely, cost effective,

and easy-to-use hardware and software tools for the retrieval and analysis of Program data and information. Products include annual additions to the master Monitoring Program database (approximately a 10% annual increase);

software products for analyzing and displaying data (3-5

specific applications); improved methods for distributing

data and information (expanded use of CD-ROM and

Internet technologies); providing database development

and maintenance solutions to meet the program needs such

as budget tracking, project time management, property accountability, and mailing list; develop and execute annual

maintenance contracts, annual preventative maintenance

of equipment, plus periodic installation of hardware and

software upgrades; and the timely replacement of faulty

equipment and parts.

(L22) Develop an information transfer service to

faciilitate the sharing of information and technology

needed for resource management and decision making.

This objective involves using the World Wide Web to

ensure that resource managers, decision makers, civil authorities, and the general public can easily access and freely

download existing data files. More than 17,000 existing

files on fish, vegetation, invertebrates, water quality, water

levels, aerial photography, satellite imagery, scientific publications, and GIS maps, spatial coverages, and applications will continue to be made available. Other products

include a 15–20% annual increase in available data files

and annual updating of existing clearinghouse web pages,

operating and maintaining a National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) certified web site and Clearinghouse that

allows public access to more than 15,000 existing files and

increasing the number of files available by approximately

30% each year.

(L23) Publish study results in established report series, scientific literature, and popular publications.

This objective involves providing high quality and timely

editing and graphic support in developing scientific, tech-
21

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

nical, programatic reports, and related publications. Annual products include the production of more than 30 Monitoring Program Report Series publications, at least 15

Project Status Reports, 2–4 Program Fact Sheets, 3–6 issues of the River Almanac, and editorial support in the

preparation of at least 10 manuscripts for publication in

external peer-reviewed journals. All products are produced

in accordance with established peer-review procedures.

Support to the Department of the Army

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Goal 4 Objectives

(A01) Determine biological and water quality impacts

associated with navigation channel maintenance dredging activities.

 Work under this objective involves monitoring and

applied research in support of the Rock Island District’s 9-

ft navigation channel maintenance activities. The District’s

404 permit, allowing channel maintenance dredged material to be placed on historic placement sites, is scheduled

to expire on December 31, 1998. This permit was originally issued subject to several conditions being met. One

of those conditions was that the Corps of Engineers, in

cooperation with the appropriate federal and state resource

management agencies, would commence collecting the

natural resource data necessary to develop a scope of work

to assess the impacts of dredged material placement on

natural resources. Invertebrate sampling and associated

research has been identified as crucial to meeting permit

re-issuance requirements. The La Grange Pool of the Illinois Waterway was selected for initial invertebrate sampling due to the high level of dredging activity in that pool

and the presence of an established monitoring program

(the LaGrange Pool is an LTRMP trend pool) for that pool.

Additional sampling, to be funded by the Corps of Engineers, will be accomplished utilizing the EMTC’s standardized sampling protocols, slightly modified to better capture

dredged material placement sites, and the existing LTRMP

field station resources. It is likely that additional sampling

of various river system components at multiple locations

will be pursued as part of this effort. It is expected that the

capabilities of the EMTC and its field stations will be utilized in the implementation of the SOW developed as a

result of these sampling and research efforts.

(A02) Define the existing conditions and future without

condition for the Upper Mississippi River and Illinois

Waterway System Navigation Study Environmental Impact Statement

Work under this objective supports efforts to describe,

as part of the Upper Mississippi River and Illinois Waterway System Navigation Study EIS (Environmental Impact

Statement), the existing environmental conditions of the

UMRS and likely future system environmental

conditions. In preparing an EIS consideration is

given to what the current environmental condition is and what the future condition will be in

the absence of any recommended change. Work

accomplished under this objective will result in

fuller integration of LTRMP data and information

with other navigation study research and model

development efforts.

Support to the Department of the

Interior

National Park Service

(P01) Support National Park management efforts through the development of standardized vegetation data in selected National

Parks.

Effective management requires up-todate information on park vegetation patterns.

Work involves producing baseline data on the composition

and distribution of vegetation cover types in five selected

National Parks. The work also involves sharing the results

with National Park Service Partners for use in long-term

vegetation monitoring, resources management, research,

planning, interpretation, and operations.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

(F01) Support U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service refuge

management activities.

This objective involves providing analytical and technical services in support of refuge management activities.

Products to be developed include (1) land cover/land use

databases for 10 UMRS refuge areas, (2) development of

analytical models for more than 50 wildlife species, (3)

The EMTC operates a highly automated water quality laboratory.
22

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

Staff member servicing a Center air boat.

supporting USFWS staff use of

developed decision support tools

by conducting 5 annual training

courses.

U.S. Geological Survey

(G01) Support Partner information needs by coordinating the

Upper Midwest Gap Analysis

Program

Work involves coordination

efforts designed to avoid duplicating efforts while meeting the diverse information needs of the

participating state and federal cooperators. Products include (1)

collaborating with state partners

to map current land cover and

predicted distribution of terrestrial

vertebrates in the Upper Mississippi River basin, (2) cooperating with academic, state, and

other federal partners, to compare

and contrast models of pre-European settlement vegetation with maps of current land cover, (3) coordinating with

state Department of Natural Resources (DNR) partners in

Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin to produce

seamless maps of public ownership and management status for the Upper Midwest, (4) collaborating with these state

partners to classify satellite imagery to produce seamless

current maps of land cover for the Upper Midwest, (5) serving as regional data clearinghouse for current land cover

maps, predicted vertebrate distribution maps and public

ownership maps, and, (6) serving as regional data clearinghouse for related region-wide natural resource GIS data

produced by state, federal and academic cooperators.

(G02) Support Biological Resources Division information resources management activities.

Work involves providing generalized information resources management support to BRD National Office, Centers, field stations, USGS Cooperative Research (Co-op)

Units. Products include (1) editorial support in the development of BRD IRM and Geospatial strategic plans; (2)

providing technical support to BRD in developing, adapting, and refining spatial analysis capabilities needed to allow electronic access to widely distributed biological data;

(3) supporting BRD efforts in cataloging and describing existing biological data and information to help government

agencies and nongovernment organizations avoid costly

duplicative data collection; (4) developing new software

tools (MetaMaker and upgrades) for serving and accessing BRD biological metadata data and information over the

Internet, (5) providing annual IRM contract support to BRD

Centers on agency- and department-wide automation

equipment and services contracts; (6) providing technical

and operational World Wide Web support to 3–7 BRD Centers, field stations, and Co-op units; (7) coordinating IRM

Council activities; and (8) providing technical support to

BRD science centers in the development of 4-8 reports annually.

Support to the U.S. Department of

Agriculture

Natural Resources Conservation Service

(N01) Provide support to NRCS on its watershed management efforts.

Work under this objective involves using Center

geospatial capabilities, thematic mapping, hydrographic

surveying, and chemical analysis to support watershed

planning efforts. Products include (1) running the ADAPT

(Agriculture Drainage and Pesticide Transport) field scale

model, (2) identify land use patterns in the UMR basin that

reduce nutrient and sediment loading into the Upper Mississippi River, (3) conduct watershed modeling of nutrient/

sediment loading that incorporates physical and biological

landscape features, farming practices, and socio-economic

factors to direct mitigation efforts, and (4) develop a decision support system to identify watersheds to target Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) efforts for further application of Best Management Practices (and funding). In the UMR floodplain we will evaluate nutrient retention and flux as a result of planned water-level manipulations and natural seasonal floods in selected reaches of
23

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

the Upper Mississippi River. Our specific objectives are to

(1) determine the effect of water-level manipulations and

flooding on nitrogen, phosphorus, and silica transport from

river pools; (2) determine causal mechanisms for changes

resulting from variation in water levels; and (3) create decision-support models for use by Refuge and river managers to predict best hydraulic practices to reduce nutrient

transport from the Upper Mississippi. Results from this study

will be used to assess the role of watershed management

and floodplain functioning on biogeochemical cycles, and

to evaluate the management strategies for reducing nutrient transport from the Upper Mississippi River to the Gulf

of Mexico, for increasing regional benefits to humans, and

for enhancing the river ecosystem.

(N02) Provide support to NRCS through colaborative

efforts to assess project environmental benefits on

natural resource conservation activities

Work under this objective involves providing water quality

data, environmental assessment tools, long-term data sets,

and assistance in designing future studies. Products include (1) Conducting long-term water quality monitoring

on UMRS tributaries, (2) Assimilating water quality data

from the five state region into a unified format that accommodates NRCS information needs, (3) Assisting state offices in determining water sampling needs, (4) Providing

data in a useable GIS data format, and (5) Assisting NRCS

with designing water quality monitoring procedures

Support to the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency

(E01) Provide support in the development of oil spill

contingency plans and documentation of spill-sensitive resources.

Work under this objective includes providing technical

support in the areas of GIS and automation technology in

response to EPA requirements. Products include (1) Developing a geographic information system to spatially document sensitive resource areas within EPA Region 5, (2)

Providing oil spill responders and the public access to the

inland Waterways Spill Response Atlas through printed

copy, CD-ROM, and the World Wide Web.

Recognizing the need to balance economic and environmental activities in the UMRS, Congress is currently

considering reauthorizing the Long Term Resource Monitoring Program.
24

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

Peer Review

Peer review is the constructive evaluation of scientific proposals, products, and programs with the intent of ensuring the highest quality science. Peer review is an integral component of all science programs

at the Center and all scientific activities are subject to

either regular or periodic peer review. The peer review process at the Center conforms to all guidelines

of scientific evaluation and review as identified in

Department of the Interior, USGS, and BRD guidelines. Procedures for conducting peer review are outlined in a Center Standard Operating Procedure. In

addition, an 11-member International Science Review

Committee periodically reviews how science is conducted at the Center.

Study Planning and Approval Process

Scientific and organizational standards for development, review, and approval of study plans for research, monitoring, and technical development conducted by the Center and Program personnel are in

place at the Center. The objectives of the standard

operating procedures are to (1) provide guidelines for

development of and approval procedures for research,

monitoring, and technical development study plans;

(2) ensure that studies are relevant to the Center’s mission and are scientifically, technically, and logistically

feasible; and (3) define the roles of the Principal Investigator, Supervisor, Science Advisor, and Center

Director in developing and approving study plans.

Monitoring and Spatial Data Processing

The Center has developed standard guidelines to

ensure reliability of scientific and technical end products. These standard operating procedures (SOPs)

cover all aspects of the Center’s Long Term Resource

Monitoring and spatial data processing activities. The

individual SOP chapters receive peer review to ensure acceptance and high quality of the procedures

and practices. Revisions are made as new techniques

become known or relevant findings are incorporated

into the program.

Evaluating Performance

The Center uses several formal mechanisms for

evaluating performance. For instance, an International

Science Review Committee has been established to

periodically review overall science activities and performance. An interagency management review committee is established to periodically review

management activities and ensure

program efforts are effectively

and efficiently meeting management agency information needs.

In addition, the USGS conducts,

on a 3-year cycle, reviews of Center administrative, financial, and

scientific activities.

A formal system is in place to assess the performance of Federal

employees under the Performance Appraisal System. Employees are evaluated by their supervisors during annual performance reviews and their Position

Section V - Promoting Quality Science

Recreation is a billion dollar industry within the UMRS.
25

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

Descriptions are reviewed to ensure they accurately reflect their

duties and grade level.

The Center has adopted the

Research Grade Evaluation Guide

(RGEG) for Federal scientists at

the Center. The RGEG is a government-wide grade classification

system used to evaluate research

projects of federal scientists.

In addition, ongoing evaluations of performance will focus on

a balance of quality, productivity.

and effect of the individual or team

on the work. All BRD scientists,

research and nonresearch grade

staff, will be evaluated against the

following indicators:

Application - The relevance of

scientific results and science

products to solve real world biological resource management problems.

Timeliness - The ability to consistently finish

projects in a timely manner.

Quality - Quality of the science products, including their scope, originality, innovation, and independent recognition of the work.

Effect - The degree to which others might build

upon the findings of the science.

Mission - The degree to which the effort supports

the Center’s mission, including enhancing the

credibility and esteem of the USGS.

Rewarding Performance

The Strategic Science Plan for the BRD recognizes the critical importance of evaluating science activities and rewarding scientists, science teams, support staff, and administrators in a fair and consistent

manner. Effective implementation of a reward system

is an integral part of assuring that the BRD maintains

a high quality work force that meets the needs of the

resource management community.

Mechanisms for rewarding individual achievements are available at the Center and include the following:

On the Spot Award: Used to immediately

recognize achievements.

Special Thanks for Achieving Results

(STAR) Award: Presented for achieving results

that promote DOI programs.

Time Off Recognition: Superior accomplishment of recurring assigned duties; noteworthy accomplishments over a sustained time period; exceptional achievement in project goals; or other

specific contributions to the organizations mission.

Quality Step Increase: For sustained exceptional performance in achieving critical results with

an expectation of continued high-level performance.

Interior Innovation Award: For reducing

costs, reinventing work processes, and improving

service to customers.

Suggestion Award: Used to immediately

recognize beneficial suggestions.

These awards are presented when specific achievements deserve special recognition, not necessarily on

an annual basis. Individuals may be nominated by

any staff member. Nominations are approved by the

appropriate supervisor and the Center Director.

Sediment samples being processed.
26

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

The Center has instituted a local awards program

to further recognize outstanding scientific, technical,

and administrative contributions. Excellence awards,

including Outstanding Scientist, Outstanding Scientific Support, Outstanding Support, Outstanding Technical Service, Outstanding Customer Assistance, and

Outstanding Publication or Product, will be established. An awards committee evaluates nominations

based on criteria established for these awards and then

forwards its recommendations to the Center Director

for final approval.

Assessing Internal and External Environments

The Center will monitor both our internal and external environments on a continuous and systematic

basis. This will help us anticipate future challenges

and make adjustments so that potential problems do

not become crises.

Internal Environment

The Centers internal assessment includes its culture, scientific and management practices, and business processes. The Center uses program evaluations,

surveys, independent audits, and reviews of business

processes to monitor internal operations.

 In 1997, the Center used three comprehensive reviews to provide scientific,

management, and administrative perspectives on Center effectiveness, weaknesses, and

strengths. The reviews were

conducted by an International

Science Review Committee, an

Interagency Management Review Committee, and a USGS

Science and Administrative

Review Committee. These reviews provided valuable recommendations relating to the

general operation and management of the Center. For instance, a 1996 interagency

management review team recommended

• preparation of a strategic plan to articulate the Center

mission, vision statement, goals, and objectives as a result of greatly expanded work activities at the Center over

the past several years;

• provide a simplified “health of the river” report on an

annual basis;

• increase the use of information sharing bulletins to

expedite program findings to partners; and

• the Monitoring Program should continue beyond the

current authorized period of FY2002 with a permanent authorization and cost indexed funds.

Some of the USGS Review Team Recommendations

included

• the existing memorandum of understanding between

the Department of the Army and Interior be revised with

less burdensome interactions between the Army and the

Center, including revising the fund transfer assessment

levels;

• the Center should expand its mission beyond just the

activities of the Monitoring Program to include becoming

the data and science integration center for the entire Upper Mississippi River; and

• the Center should adopt and use the USGS Science

Information System (SIS) and study proposal process to

replace the current annual work planning process.

 In addition, a number of the International Science

Review findings directly influenced the mission, vision, goals, and objectives outlined in this strategic

The Center processes more than 60,000 water samples per year.
27

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

plan. The following paragraphs summarize some of

these key findings:

• The Center has successfully implemented a

monitoring and research infrastructure that is operational and producing results that are relevant

to management decision making. Analysis, synthesis, and modeling will become even more important functions for the Center in helping explain

and understand reported trend findings.

• The Center has established an excellent information base for current and future decision making. In addition, these capabilities have been

achieved by effective cooperation among several

Federal agencies and five state partners so solutions to problems spanning several political and

administrative units can be undertaken efficiently.

The relevancy of the Center’s work to important

clients and partners is indisputable.

• The Center should consider expanding the scope

of their efforts to include scientific modeling of the

relationships between human and natural activities in the entire Upper Mississippi River drainage

basin as they affect the ecological status of designated river reaches. Conditions in the river cannot be separated from conditions in the drainage

basin that sustains it.

• In both organization and geographical focus, the

work conducted through the Center is an important demonstration of how regional government

responsibilities that transgress administrative

boundaries might effectively be discharged in the

future.

• The Center is providing regional and national

leadership in the implementation of high technology analytical tools and information management

technology. The quality of data management, the

availability of the data, and the mechanisms for

the electronic transfer and dissemination of information are truly exceptional and a model for such

long term data gathering programs.

• The Center’s geographic information system

(GIS), photo interpretation, and remote sensing

efforts are excellent and should be continued. Resource managers and decision makers are finding the GIS maps and models to be of exceptional

value to river planning.

External Environment

Assessing the external environment is particularly

important, in part because so many forces beyond the

Center’s immediate influence can powerfully affect

chances for success.

Partner Survey

Partners are periodically queried as to the level of

client satisfaction with the relevance, quality, timeliness, and utility of Center products and services. Partners are also represented in formal reviews of program progress, quality of science, and relevance to conservation information needs.

In 1996 the interagency Management Review Committee conducted a survey of Program partners. That survey concluded that

nearly 94 percent of responding individuals

believe efforts to implement the congressionally mandated Monitoring Program had

been successful and nearly 79 percent of respondents were currently using Monitoring

Program products in their activities.

Public Survey

Within the context of the Center’s mission,

a survey of 2500 individuals of the general

public within the UMRB basin was conducted in late 1996 to assay river resource

values and expectations. The survey response rate was 60% and the results are considered accurate to +/- 2%. Center staff have access to up-to-date analyitcal tools.
28

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

Results (for all respondents combined) showed

that citizens value and appreciate the Mississippi River

in complex ways, and have diverse opinions about how

the Mississippi River should be managed in the future. Water quality and pollution were overwhelmingly

the biggest concerns held by citizens. Potential management actions related to these issues received the

strongest support. Efforts to improve and increase

habitat and the aesthetic quality of the River ranked

next highest, followed by flood protection measures.

Below are some external forces that may affect or

are affecting the Center’s ability to succeed

• Public Law 99-662 authorizing the Monitoring Program and Information Management portions of the EMP

requires a “Report to Congress” prior to 2002 on recommendations to continue, modify, or terminate the

Program. The report is complete and recommends

Program continuation and expansion, but authorization is beyond the Center’s influence.

• Appropriated funding for the Monitoring Program

comes through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers appropriation process. The Department of Interior currently has no involvement in out-year budget requests.

The inability of the USGS to plan for major funding

changes causes major disruption in programs.

• The Monitoring Program has resided in three

agencies within the Department of the Interior in nine

years. The constantly changing administrative and

management culture has disrupted science planning

and implementation in addition to causing poor agency

support.

• The Monitoring Program’s funds originate in one

agency and are passed to another, and often to a third

for actually conducting certain monitoring and research

activities. Traditional agency assessment policies do

not equitably apply in these situations, often resulting

in a substantial portion of available funds being consumed in various cost recovery, and other overhead

assessments.

• Funding passed from one agency to another seldom has associated personnel allocations, thus creating obstacles and higher costs associated with mission accomplishment.

• Funding levels for the Monitoring Program were

established in the early 1980s and never cost indexed,

resulting in a constant erosion of mission capabilities

that are currently less than 50 percent of those originally planned. Partner expectations however, continue

to rise.

• Obtaining agreement on information needs among

often competing shareholders is difficult, especially during periods of declining resources.

Aligning Center Activities

The Center uses the results of reviews, surveys,

audits, and evaluations associated with both external

and internal assessments to align its resources, activities, and core processes to increase its efficiency and

effectiveness in support of partner information needs. For example, recommendations of the three recent review committees have been or are being incorporated into the Center’s operations. Some

of these items include preparation of this

strategic plan, completing a “health of the

river” report, increasing the publication

of Project Status Reports, revising the

memorandum of understanding between

the Departments of the Army and the Interior, adoption of the USGS Science Information System and Study Proposal

Process to replace the present Annual

Work Plan process, converting Center scientists to the Research Grade Evaluation

Guide, and realigning the Center’s organizational structure.

Results of the survey to assess public

river resource values and expectations

Ecological analysis and resource management activities are supported

through the development of spatial databases using state-of-the-art

GIS tools.
29

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

will assist us in prioritizing Center activities.

This process allows us to collect the information needed by management agencies to ensure

that public values are met.

Many of the items listed under the external environment section–items that may affect

or are affecting the Center’s ability to succeed–

are being discussed in various negotiations.

These negotiations involve revisions to the

memorandum of understanding between the

Departments of the Army and Interior; discussions with the Department of Interior’s Inspector General’s Office; and activities taking place

within the legislative system.

Field station staff preparing for daily data collection efforts.

Administrative Support

All personnel and science study efforts require basic support services (space, equipment, supplies, mail,

computing, communications, training, library, travel,

payroll, records management, etc.) which are provided

as a basic function of the Center. A prorated charge is

assessed to each program area to cover the costs associated with these functions. This procedure will continue throughout the term of this strategic plan.

Basic Infrastructure

Existing Center and Field Station infrastructure

(boats, motors, trailers, vehicles, sampling gear, laboratory equipment, office equipment, and computer

technology) was initially acquired and installed assuming a 10-year Program life. Minor infrastructure

adjustments (mostly for safety reasons) were made

when the Monitoring Program was extended for five

additional years. These vital infrastructure resources

are nearing the end of their useful physical and technological life. Near-term efforts will address the need

to fund infrastructure refreshment using standard lifecycle management procedures.

Section VI - Implementation Strategies

Plan Implementation

Included in Appendix B are short (1–2 year) and

long term (3–5 year) strategies for implementing this

plan. These strategies will be revised as required to

account for changes in funding, staffing levels, and

operational requirements.

Summary

• The format of this plan is consistent with the

planning guidance of USGS and the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993.

• The content of this plan will be reviewed annually and adjusted and supplemented as necessary to reflect a five-year planning horizon.

• This plan provides the basis for the ongoing

management of Center scientific and technical activities and serves as the basis for budget

planning.

• Supporting documentation identified in this

plan will be developed to more fully define specific work activities and to monitor Center accomplishments and performance.
30

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

STEP 1 - Draft list of recommended work activities are developed jointly with Long Term Resource Monitoring Program Partners (Environmental Management Program Coordinating Committee including the states of Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin), Environmental Management Program Coordinating Committee Analysis Team, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, etc. and submitted to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mississippi Valley Division for review and evaluation.

STEP 2 - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mississippi Valley Division reviews and approves Draft

Work Activity List and provides guidance on priorities.

STEP 3 - Environmental Management Technical

Center and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,

Mississippi Valley Division develop Final Recommended Work Activity List including priorities and probable products.

STEP 4 - Environmental Management Technical

Center prepares Study Concept Proposals for Final Work Activity list items and provides these to

Mississippi Valley Division.

STEP 5 - Final Recommended Work Activity List

and companion Study Concept Proposals with information on priorities and probable products is

distributed to Long Term Resource Monitoring

Program Partners for review and comment.

STEP 6 - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Rock

Island District and the Environmental Management Technical Center modifies final list, priorities, and products (Based on input from the Long

Term Resource Monitoring Program Partners) as

necessary and submits to the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers, Mississippi Valley Division for evaluation, review, and approval.

STEP 7 - Environmental Management Technical

Center prepares detailed scopes of work2

 and the

Annual Performance Plan which include, products,

schedule, and cost estimates based on final activity list and study concept proposals

STEP 8 - Annual Performance Plan is distributed

to Long Term Resource Monitoring Program Partners for review and comment

STEP 9 - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mississippi Valley Division and the Environmental Management Technical Center make final adjustments

necessitated by comments received in Step 8.

STEP 10 - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mississippi Valley Division reviews and approves

Annual Performance Plan.

STEP 11 - Environmental Management Technical Center executes Annual Performance Plan, and

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Rock Island

District and Program Partners monitor Annual

Performance Plan execution.

STEP 12 - Environmental Management Technical Center prepares and distributes Annual Performance Report which reviews the Center’s success in achieving the performance goals for the

fiscal year.

Appendix A

1

 The identified steps are not intended to articulate internal agency actions relating to the Work Activity Process.

2

 Detailed scopes of work are only prepared for new starts. Ongoing studies already have detailed scopes of work.

Recommended Long Term Resource Monitoring Program

Work Activity Process1
31

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

Appendix B

Implementation Strategies

Underlying Assumptions

Both the short term (1-2 year) and longer term (3-5

years) implementation strategies assume that:

1) the fiscal year (FY) 1999–2002 appropriated funding levels do not fall below the

proposed FY 1999 level for the Monitoring

Program ($5.618 million),

2) the current Report to Congress recommendations are authorized by the end of the

5-year planning horizon with increasing

appropriation levels,

3) agency assessments are appropriately

applied and used and do not exceed FY 98

levels,

4) The Center will continue to expand the

spatial and temporal scales of data by

leveraging external funding and by using

cooperative approaches,

5) should funding levels during the 5-year

planning horizon fall below the proposed

FY 1999 levels and/or reauthorization does

not occur, the USGS will work with partners to restructure the Monitoring Program

to optimally fit the fund allocation, and

6) extramural funding associated with nonLTRMP but related projects (e.g. GAP

Analysis, National Park Mapping, EPA Oil

Pollution Control Act, and HREP Studies)

will continue at or above existing levels.

Short Term (1-2 years) Implementation

Strategy

1) Complete a revised Monitoring Program

work priority process in conjunction with

partner agencies.

2) Coordinate with the Environmental

Management Program Coordinating

Committee the development of a charter for

the Monitoring Program’s Analysis Team

that clearly articulates member roles and

responsibilities.

3) Complete a revision of the existing

Memorandum of Understanding between

the Department of Army (DOA) and the

Department of Interior (DOI) to reflect

current and revised roles and responsibilities.

4) Fill critical Center staff shortages as

articulated in the Center’s Position Management Plan.

5) Fully implement the USGS study planning process. This will include preparing

study plans to cover the 5-year planning

horizon for each of the priority objectives

listed in this Plan.

6) Fully implement the USGS Science

Information System (SIS) to provide

electronic access to all Center studies.

7) Participate in developing a USGS

Center (EMTC/UMSC) merger plan.

8) Fully implement any remaining review

committee(s) recommendations.

9) Complete a statistical review of the Long

Term Resource Monitoring Program data.

This review will serve as a guide for potential changes in monitoring program data

collection.

10) Apply remaining unexpended FY 1995

and FY 1996 Monitoring Program funds to

initiation of a Habitat Needs Assessment

(HNA).
32

Strategic Plan

Providing sound science for better management

11) Assist in completing a Habitat Needs

Assessment.

12) Seek full restoration of any past excess

assessments.

13) Develop individual plans with each

Monitoring Program field station to expand

the level of applied research and to encourage increasing the educational level requirements of certain field station staff to facilitate additional analysis and research capabilities.

14) Ensure Monitoring Program field station

study and research activities are included in

the USGS Science Information System.

15) Implement revised DOA to DOI

Monitoring Program fund transfer by use of

Department of Treasury Standard Form

1151 instead of the currently used Department of Defense Form 448.

16) Continue to seek extramural funding for

projects that are consistent with identified

center mission and objectives.

Longer Term (3-5 years) Implementation

Strategies

1) Acquire additional critical staff positions

as articulated in the Center’s Position

Management Plan.

2) Make changes in Monitoring Program

data collection efforts as appropriate.

3) Implement any authorized Report to

Congress recommendations.

4) Apply any restored assessment funds to

Monitoring Program equipment replacement and priority data analysis and research

efforts.

5) Continue to implement priority strategic

plan objectives based on scopes-of-work

covering the 5-year planning horizon.

6) Continue implementing Center merger

plan.

7) Continue to seek extramural funding for

projects that are consistent with identified

center mission and objectives.
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved

OMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing

data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or

any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information

Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction

Project (0704-0188), Washington, D.C. 20503

1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES

July 1998

COVERED

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS

Environmental Management Technical Center Strategic Plan with implementation objectives for the period 1998-2002

6. AUTHOR(S)

U.S. Geological Survey

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

 REPORT NUMBER

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING

U.S. Geological Survey 

Environmental Management Technical Center 98-P013

575 Lester Avenue

Onalaska, Wisconsin 54650-8552

 AGENCY REPORT NUMBER

11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE

Release unlimited. Available from National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161 

(1-800-553-6847 or 703-487-4650. Available to registered users from the Defense Technical Information Center, Attn: 

Help Desk, 8725 Kingman Road, Suite 0944, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6218 (1-800-225-3842 or 703-767-9050).

13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)

The plan describes the strategic direction of the Environmental Management Technical Center will follow in the execution of the Long Term Resource Monitoring

Program for 1998 through 2002 to the management partners, the scientific community, and the general public. It includes the center mission, vision, and guiding

principles; goals and 5-year objectives; science capabilities, means of promoting quality science; processes for conducting science; and performance measures. The plan

also describes forces that may influence success. The six goals are described in terms of the defining and performance objectives. 

14. SUBJECT TERMS 15. NUMBER OF PAGES

Environment, LTRMP, Mississippi River, program, river, science 32 pp.

16. PRICE CODE

17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 19. SECURITY 20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT

 OF REPORT OF THIS PAGE CLASSIFICATION

Unclassified Unclassified

 OF ABSTRACT

Unclassified