Data contains sampling station locations with physical and chemical data. Data: stations 508.xlsx (Ohio dataset), env.bio70 508.xlsx (WV biological station dataset). This dataset is associated with the following publication: Cormier, S., L. Zheng, G. Suter, and C. Flaherty. Assessing background levels of specific conductivity using weight of evidence. SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT. Elsevier BV, AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS, 628-629: 1637-1649, (2018).

There are 3 data sets. Two zip files contain paired biological (benthic macroinvertebrate genera) (Data Biological.zip) and water quality data (Data Environmental.zip). These were used to estimate background specific conductivity from these state data and estimate the HC05 using the field based extirpation concentration method (USEPA 2011). The zipped files (Griffith ion MG20150729) contains two csv miles with ions summaries and ion and specific conductivity data from the combined EPA survey data. This dataset is associated with the following publication: Cormier, S., L. Zheng, R. Novak, and C. Flaherty. A flow-chart for developing water quality criteria from two field-based methods. SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT. Elsevier BV, AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS, 633: 1647-1656, (2018).

In sechs kleinen bis mittelgrossen Fliessgewässern wurden die für aquatische Organismen extrem toxischen Pyrethroid- und Organophosphatinsektizide mittels einer Spezialanalytik bis in den Picogramm pro-Liter Bereich quantifiziert. An fünf der sechs untersuchten Standorte überschritten die gemessenen Insektizidkonzentrationen regelmässig chronische und zum Teil akute Qualitätskriterien und die chronische Mischungsrisiko¬bewertung zeigte während 43-100% des Untersuchungszeitraums hohe Risiken für die Invertebratengemeinschaft an. Werden Pyrethroid- und Organophosphatinsektizide nicht in die Beurteilung der Gewässerqualität miteinbezogen, kann das Gesamtrisiko für aquatische Organismen erheblich unterschätzt werden.

Learn the condition of local streams, lakes and other waters anywhere in the US... quickly and in plain language. See if your local waterway was checked for pollution, what was found, and what is being done.

This endpoint provides the instantaneous generation outturn (Generation By Fuel type) to give our users an indication of the generation outturn for Great Britain. The data is aggregated by Fuel Type category and updated at five-minute intervals with average MW values over 5 minutes for each category.

NHD_MajorAreas are a subset of the largest double banked stream/river polygon features selected from the High Resolution NHD dataset for Washington State. This subset includes only NHDAreas that have an associated NHD_MajorStream. NHD_MajorStreams are classified as those that have GNIS Names that include "River", or have a Stream Order > 7, or have a GNIS Name that includes "Creek" and is longer than 24 km. NHD_MajorAreas have an NHD_MajorStream flowing through it.The National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) is a feature-based database that interconnects and uniquely identifies the stream segments or reaches that make up the nation's surface water drainage system. This high-resolution NHD, generally developed at 1: 12,000/1:24,000 scale, adds detail to the original 1:100,000-scale NHD. Local resolution NHD is being developed where partners and data exist. The NHD contains reach codes for networked features, flow direction, names, and centerline representations for areal water bodies. Reaches are also defined on waterbodies and the approximate shorelines of the Great Lakes, the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and the Gulf of Mexico. The NHD also incorporates the National Spatial Data Infrastructure framework criteria established by the Federal Geographic Data Committee. Updated March 2019

NHD_MajorStreams are a subset of the largest linear stream/river features selected from the High Resolution NHD dataset for Washington State. This subset includes only NHDflowlines that have GNIS Names that include "River", or have a Stream Order > 7, or have a GNIS Name that includes "Creek" and is longer than 24 km. The National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) is a feature-based database that interconnects and uniquely identifies the stream segments or reaches that make up the nation's surface water drainage system. This high-resolution NHD, generally developed at 1:12,000/1:24,000 scale, adds detail to the original 1:100,000-scale NHD Local resolution NHD is being developed where partners and data exist. The NHD contains reach codes for networked features, flow direction, names, and centerline representations for areal water bodies. Reaches are also defined on waterbodies and the approximate shorelines of the Great Lakes, the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and the Gulf of Mexico. The NHD also incorporates the National Spatial Data Infrastructure framework criteria established by the Federal Geographic Data Committee. Updated March 2019

Streams where populations of New Zealand Mudsnails have been confirmed. Created as a featureclass and linear event table based on the current version of the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD).

Rivers and Lakes in Washington where known populations of New Zealand mudsnails (Potamopyrgus antipodarum) exist upstream or in the immediate watershed. Originally created from Washington Rivers polygon layer in 2010. Addtional polygons imported from NHDArea and NHDWaterbody beginning in 2014.

The National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) program was initiated by the Atomic Energy Commission (now the Department of Energy; DOE) in 1973 with a primary goal of identifying uranium resources in the United States. The Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance (HSSR) program was one of nine components of NURE. Planned systematic sampling of stream sediments, soils, groundwater, and surface water over the entire United States began in 1975 under the responsibility of four DOE national laboratories: Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLL), Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory (LASL), Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant (ORGDP), and Savannah River Laboratory (SRL). Each DOE laboratory developed its own sample collection, analytical, and data management methodologies and hired contractors to collect the samples. The NURE HSSR sampling program ended prematurely in 1980. The samples were analyzed and the resultant geochemical data were released on 9-track tapes and in a series of publications. By 1984, the NURE program was finished as Congressional funding disappeared. Out of a total of 625 2-degree quadrangles that cover the entire lower 48 States and Alaska, only 307 quadrangles were completely sampled and another 86 quadrangles were partially sampled. The HSSR data consisted of 894 separate data files stored on magnetic tape in 47 different file formats. The University of Oklahoma's Information Systems Programs of the Energy Resources Institute (ISP) was contracted by the Department of Energy to enhance the accessibility and usefulness of the NURE HSSR data. ISP created a single standard-format master file to replace 894 original files. ISP converted only 817 of the 894 original files before their funding ended. Unfortunately, this conversion process was never completed and introduced several systematic errors into the database. In 1985, the NURE HSSR sample archive, original field maps, field notes, and data tapes became the responsibility of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). A copy of the ISP-formatted NURE HSSR database was released as two CD-ROM publications (Hoffman and Buttleman, 1994; 1996). A new effort to recompile the NURE HSSR was begun by the USGS in 1995. All of the original 894 files have been examined, reformatted, and added to this USGS enhanced version of the NURE HSSR data. The data are contained in 2 major database files: one for water samples and one for sediment samples (which also includes soil and some rock samples.) An earlier version of this USGS enhanced version of the NURE HSSR data was released as an online Open-File Report at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1997/ofr-97-0492/ --USGS: http://mrdata.usgs.gov/metadata/nurehssr.faq.html

These two shapefiles represent New Mexico NHD High Resolution stream segments and waterbodies, merged and clipped to the state boundary. RAW NHD High Resolution data, including additional layer files, is available from: https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/basic/

Water Masters actively administer the distribution of water from stream systems on a daily basis. This site contains links to individual Water Masters and access to Water Master Reports.

OSE/ISC maintains a network of stream, acequia, ditch and well monitoring sites that electronically transmits data values via radio and satellite telemetry and stores the data in a database. This real-time water measurement data is available for each active gage/well shown on select basin maps.

Currently, users can either view this data directly in a web browser, though this can be confusing to users who do not understand the SensorThings API (https://newmexicowaterdata.org/faq/#sensorthingsapi) structure. Users who have some programming knowledge can also query this data with the Python programming language following this tutorial (https://developer.newmexicowaterdata.org/help). Development is currently underway for applications that more easily allow general users to query and visualize this data.

The Channel Migration Potential (CHAMP) layer contains stream networks of Western Washington (and much of Western Oregon) with associated data and information important for assessing channel migration activity. It also features information on channel characteristics such as stream flow and physical dimensions. This data layer’s main feature is a classification of channel migration potential based on channel confinement and erosion potential. The layer was derived from existing statewide geospatial datasets and classified according to channel migration measurements by the High Resolution Change Detection (HRCD) project for the Puget Sound Region (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2014). While the layer identifies the potential for channel migration, it does not predict channel migration rates. Thus, this data layer should be used to screen and prioritize stream reaches for further channel migration evaluation. The tool helps plan and prioritize floodplain management actions such as Channel Migration Zone mapping, erosion risk reduction, and floodplain restoration. The background, use, and development of the CHAMP layer are fully described in Ecology Publication 15-06-003 (full report citation and URL below). That report also describes visual assessment techniques that should be used along with the CHAMP layer to assess channel migration potential. Legg, N.T. and Olson, P.L., 2015, Screening Tools for Identifying Migrating Stream Channels in Western Washington: Geospatial Data Layers and Visual Assessments: Washington State Department of Ecology Publication 15-06-003, 40 p. https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/SummaryPages/1506003.htmlThe tool developers would like to thank the following people for their contribution to this work: • Brian D. Collins (University of Washington) • Jerry Franklin (Washington Department of Ecology) • Christina Kellum (Washington Department of Ecology) • Matt Muller (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife) • Hugh Shipman (Washington Department of Ecology) • Terry Swanson (Washington Department of Ecology) This project has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency under Puget Sound Ecosystem Restoration and Protection Cooperative Agreement Grant PC-00J27601 with Washington Department of Ecology. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.Generally, this data layer should be used to screen and prioritize stream reaches for further channel migration evaluation. The data resolution does not allow one to predict channel migration. The classification identifies stream segments for further examination, and those that likely require limited attention or analysis. The potential uncertainty involved in the classification approach is a reason for the visual assessment techniques (described below in Ecology Publication 15-06-003) being described along with the CHAMP data layer.

Ecology created SMA_Jurisdiction_Streams (also known as SMA_Arcs_Adopt) by selecting appropriate flowlines from the National Hydrographic Dataset "NHDFlowline.lyr" as maintained by the Department of Ecology in conjunction with the USGS. This dataset can be used with linear referencing and is synchronized with the March 2019 version of NHD.The original official list of streams that meet the 20 cubic feet per second (cfs) mean annual flow criteria found in state rule at WAC 173-18 HAS BEEN SUPERSEDED by lists contained in Ecology-approved shoreline master programs.Each local government master program shall include a list of streams constituting shorelines of the state within the jurisdiction of the master program that complies with the requirements of RCW 90.58.030 (2)(d). When such master program is approved by the department, subsequent to the effective date of this provision, the list within the master program shall be the official list for that jurisdiction and shall supersede the list contained herein. Streams and rivers westof the Cascades crest with a mean annual flow of 1,000 cfs or greater, and eastof the Cascades crest with either a mean annual flow or 200 cfs or more orthe portion downstream from the first 300 square miles of drainage areas are classified as shorelines of statewide significance.

Points on streams and rivers where SMA jurisdiction begins as published in Chapter 173-18 WAC. This layer will not be updated. It is slowly becoming outdated as cities and counties update their list of SMA streams in their shoreline master program. See WAC 173-18-044 posted at http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=173-18-044.Point locations were originally compiled for Ecology in 1972 by the US Geological Survey, Water Resources Division, Tacoma, WA, and released in STREAMS OF WASHINGTON UNDER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1971. Points were determined using multiple-regression techniques based on streamflow and basin precipitation records. Ecology has occasionally updated point locations, and added and subtracted points since 1972.

Streams and rivers published in Chapter 173-18-WAC. This layer will not be updated. It is slowly becoming outdated as cities and counties update their list of Shoreline Management Act streams in their shoreline master program. See WAC 173-18-044 posted at http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=173-18-044.The upstream points where SMA jurisdiction begins were originally compiled for Ecology in 1972 by the US Geological Survey, Water Resources Division, Tacoma, WA, and released in STREAMS OF WASHINGTON UNDER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1971. Points were determined using multiple-regression techniques based on streamflow and basin precipitation records. Ecology has occasionally updated those points and added and subtracted SMA streams and portions of SMA streams since 1972.

Water bodies (lakes, wetlands, etc.) published in Chapter 173-20 WAC. These will be replaced by water body lists published in local government shoreline master programs. See Chapter 173-20-044 WAC.

This dataset contains spatial and attribute information of the Surface Water Quality Standards for the State of Washington, Chapter 173-201A WAC. Four views of the WQ Standard are contained in this dataset, Freshwater Beneficial Uses, Seasonal Supplemental Spawning and Egg Incubation Temperature Standards, rules designated in Table 602, and exceptions to Table 602 listed in the footnotes. If any discrepancies are found between GIS layers and the published rule, the published rule takes precedence. Updated April 2018.

This dataset contains spatial and attribute information of the Surface Water Quality Standards for the State of Washington, Chapter 173-201A WAC. Four views of the WQ Standard are contained in this dataset, Freshwater Beneficial Uses, Seasonal Supplemental Spawning and Egg Incubation Temperature Standards, rules designated in Table 602, and exceptions to Table 602 listed in the footnotes. If any discrepancies are found between GIS layers and the published rule, the published rule takes precedence. Updated April 2018.

This dataset contains spatial and attribute information of the Surface Water Quality Standards for the State of Washington, Chapter 173-201A WAC. Four views of the WQ Standard are contained in this dataset, Freshwater Beneficial Uses, Seasonal Supplemental Spawning and Egg Incubation Temperature Standards, rules designated in Table 602, and exceptions to Table 602 listed in the footnotes. If any discrepancies are found between GIS layers and the published rule, the published rule takes precedence. Updated April 2018.

From the site: "This statewide watershed coverage (12 digit HUC) was provided by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). The coverage is in ArcView shapefile format and has been compressed with WinZip. Readme and draft metadata files are included in the zipped file. [Includes] Detailed stream coverage at 1:100,000 compiled from EPA River Reach 3 files. The Scenic Rivers Program was established in 1968 with the passage of the Tennessee Scenic Rivers Act. Since passage of this act, the General Assembly has designated sections of 13 rivers as State Scenic Rivers. Many of these Scenic Rivers are managed cooperatively with other local, state and federal agencies as well as with non-governmental organizations. The Scenic Rivers Program seeks to preserve valuable selected rivers, or sections thereof, in their free-flowing natural or scenic conditions and to protect their water quality and adjacent lands. The program seeks to preserve within the scenic rivers system itself, several different types and examples of river areas, including mountain streams and deep gorges of east Tennessee, the pastoral rivers of middle Tennessee, and the swamp rivers of west Tennessee. State Scenic Rivers are managed according to the Rules for the Management of Tennessee Natural Resource Areas."

The Air, Water, and Aquatic Environments (AWAE) research program is one of eight Science Program areas within the Rocky Mountain Research Station (RMRS). Our science develops core knowledge, methods, and technologies that enable effective watershed management in forests and grasslands, sustain biodiversity, and maintain healthy watershed conditions.