No phone attendees

 The meeting began at approximately 9:15 a.m.

NHD DISCUSSION

Sandra Thiel began the meeting by introducing Zack Maillard (who would demo his NHD tools) and asking what everyone else had been doing with the NHD editing process.

Al Rea stated that USGS had not been able to do anything except house the edits internally, and those were minimal.  They are waiting for the new Tools that are supposed to be ready soon, although the tools may be for internal editing purposes only, and will not provide a way to feed the edits back to NHD.

Not all 50 states have a stewardship program in place like Idaho.  As far as the group knew, nobody else is sending edits back yet because they are waiting for the new tools, so Idaho is leading the way in this endeavor.

The major push within NHD was to finish the data and set up a tracking system, and developing the tools was pushed back until this was accomplished.  Since Keven Roth retired, Jeff Simley has been running things.

There is a need to figure out how to get edits back to NHD, instead of focusing so much on tracking, etc.

Part of the problem has been some “organizational chaos” within agencies, and that has made it very difficult to make much progress with getting a final set of tools developed, with people leaving, moving, etc.

The Idaho training provided some good guidelines for completing the Form Filler Edits.  Idaho would like to push on and know what to fill in.  The edits are getting done, and most of them have primarily been focused on naming canals.  Whatever the edits, they should all be done anyway.  Zack’s program uses GNIS names to name the streams and canals.  Other developments can be made for additional editing capabilities.

After the edits have been done, they are eventually supposed to be sent via FTP to USGS.  Idaho would like to send individual edits instead of whole Geodatabase (GBD) files.  There was some discussion as to whether sending the entire GDB will be required, or if that process has recently been changed by NHD.

EPA has had their edits queued-up for 1 ½ years now.  They are using the same process/data model, but on 100k NHD, and they are holding and waiting.  They are currently testing a load process to get the data back into the USGS repository.

Sandra Thiel did some edits to the Middle Fork Payette huc in Idaho, and sent those edits in to NHD.  There was a problem with one table that was not filled in.  Sandra corrected the table and sent the edits back to NHD.  She hasn’t yet heard anything back from Carl on the second set.

Zack has been using a tool that he developed, following the NHD procedures.  Per a phone conversation with Sandra, Carl would like to have this tool also.  The group discussed the possibility of forwarding this tool and asking that it be incorporated into the NHD toolset.

Until the other tools are released, it is uncertain whether or not Zack’s tools mimic the new tools or not.

Zack Maillard described his new tool to the group, which was developed from the use of the Arc Network Tools and trace toolbar.  This toolset accesses the GNIS, and names arcs in batch, using modified applications created from “out of the box” technology to accomplish these tasks.  Zack created a “flow line naming task” toolset, which is the same as the network toolset, but will allow you to edit features.  This will only allow the user to name features with the official GNIS names, from a pick list.  The user must be editing a NHD database.  Arcs that appear to have background shading are not named. 

Zack demonstrated his naming/editing tool to the group.  The GNIS names have been filtered to expedite processing.  There is an option to update the metadata tables, which will update the status, flow line, reach code, etc.  The tool will only update the arcs when the Update metadata tables option is checked.

Right now, IDWR is maintaining at least 2 complete datasets, which will need to be updated – 1) SDE and 2) Personal GDB.  Zack also created a tool that will log the edits that have been made.  The log has a timestamp also, and it is in xml format.  Zack wrote another tool to take this xml and put the edits back into the Personal GDB.

The GNIS name change requests are not the lengthy process they once were.  It is now only taking 3-4 weeks, instead of years, to get a name changed. 

Many of the names (like Squaw Creek) in Frank Robert’s area (Coeur d’Alene Tribe) will be changed very soon.

Zack described a flaw that he has found in the table design, relative to SQL Server, which has a text limit of 8,062 characters per row, combined total.  There is a table called “NHDMetadata", and the “memo” field often pushes the characters above this limit, and it will not automatically truncate, often resulting in an ArcMap crash.  The group stated that this could possibly be an ESRI fix.  Zack stated that this is only affecting one table – the NHDMetadata table – the rest of the tables load with no problems.  There is just one N-text, which is a non-searchable element, and often too large and that creates the crash.

Al Rea stated that he could talk to the folks at NHD and make them aware of the problem.  Zack will write up a description of the problem and send to Al. Al will present these findings to the NHD group during his meeting the week of February 7^th.  It will be interesting to see if anyone at NHD has encountered this problem before and if there are any known fixes for it.

The editing tools for naming have been easier to develop than the tools dealing with Geometric editing.  These have been a problem, and possibly part of the reason it has taken so long to get these tools released.

Sandra Thiel asked about the canals that have been plowed under.  Should they be retained as historical?  Should a new f-type field of “abandoned”, “non-existent”, or “destroyed” be added?

Tracy Fuller stated that this might be very difficult to accomplish with NHD.  He stated that the Forest Service wanted an “ephemeral” category added to the f-type, which is a channel that only fills when it rains.  There was a lot of discussion of the definition of perennial vs. intermittent accuracy levels within the dataset, and it was finally concluded that attribute changes WITHOUT geometry changes are fine and within the guidelines.  Geometric edits within the database are strongly discouraged because they have a ripple effect, and can cause problems.  In cases where the canals have been plowed under, Idaho may want to create a special event table to put on top of what there is now, so that this feature can be identified.

EPA is currently looking at canal and drainage lining types, and may need to add a new even table for this field also.

Sandra Thiel stated that she has encountered areas where arcs should be connected, but aren’t.  At what point do you extend, and at what point do you add a new arc?

There was some discussion regarding this, and Tracy Fuller stated that if it is supposed to be there, but missing, extend it.  If not, add an arc and call it an artificial path or connector.  In these cases, if it creates a new junction it will be the same reach code, but a new com-id.

Sandra Thiel asked about the new watershed boundaries.  Many of the 4^th field boundary lines have been updated and have significantly changed from their original shape.  Who and how will all the reach codes be migrated?

Tracy Fuller stated that this should be a national issue, because most all states have significantly changed their 4^th field boundary lines with the new WBD updates.  Tracy Fuller asked Al Rea if he could find some additional funding for this application, so that a mass migrate tool could possibly be developed.

It was decided to ask Paul Wiese in Denver about this and find out what other states have done.  Sandra Thiel will draft a letter and send it to the folks at NHD describing the problem.

The reach codes will change, but the com-id should NEVER change.

Edit flow processing is currently SDE to GDB (in-house), then send via FTP to USGS.  When Idaho eventually is able to receive the edits back, the process should be USGS to GDB to SDE.

The NHD portion of this meeting concluded at approximately 11:30 a.m.  The group broke for a quick lunch, and the Watershed Portion of the meeting began at approximately 12:15 p.m.

HUC REVIEW

Portneuf 17040208 – The TWG reviewed a portion of this huc during the meeting.  The following changes were recommended:

Naming error – Replace “Palisades” with Portneuf where applicable.

South Fork Topance Creek will be broken out as a pure 6^th field, and North Fork Topance Creek and Little Topance Creek will combine into another 6^th. 

Twentyfour Mile Creek was broken out as a separate 6^th, bringing the outlet to the confluence of the Portneuf River.

The 6^th field line previously delineated at the dam of the Chesterfield Reservoir was removed, and the residual area leftover from Twentyfour Mile Creek was grouped with this 6^th field, and will remain “Fourth of July Creek-Portneuf River”.

The confluence where Eighteen Mile Creek meets Twentyfour Mile Creek was cleaned up.

The group worked to re-define all of the 6^th fields in the Middle Portneuf River 5^th field unit. 

**Note – for all edits listed above, please see shapefile “TWG20060118.shp” for specific line placement and line deletions.

Genna Ashley will make these edits and bring this huc back for a continuing review in March.

Blackfoot 17040207 – Due to time limitations, this huc was deferred until the March TWG.  This huc will be reviewed in March.

Upper Snake Rock 17040212 – Due to time limitations, this huc was deferred until the March TWG.  This huc will be reviewed in March.

ACTION ITEMS:

Gene Dana will send Genna Ashley his copy of the NHD meeting notes so that she can incorporate them into the watershed minutes.

Al Rea will speak to the folks at NHD and make them aware of the problem during his meetings the week of February 7^th.  Zack will write up a description of the problem and send to Al so that he can present the findings to them.  The problem is the file size for the Metadata field.  Paul Wiese in Denver will change the file size on the next version of NHD.

Sandra Thiel will draft a letter to NHD asking about the mass migration of the NHD to fit the new 4^th field watershed boundaries

Genna Ashley will work on the Portneuf edits and bring this unit back in March for a continuing review.

MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION

Genna Ashley asked about the watershed toolset that has been in development.  Al Rea stated that he thought the toolset was available, but notices have not been circulated.  He suggested contacting either Karen Hanson or Kenny Legleiter to see if these tools were really available.  Genna Ashley will make these contacts.

Al Rea stated that Steve Garcia would be working on the updates for the WBD dataset as soon as funding is available.  Steve will update linework to 24k standards and possibly work on attributing too.

Gene Dana has received a graphic showing progress for the TVC data from Bob Smith.  He has not yet received any data.  As soon as this data is received, he will make it available to the Idaho Watershed TWG members to aid in delineations.

NEXT SCHEDULED TWG MEETING (S):

Week of February 13-17, 2006 - Review of Idaho WBD Dataset at the Idaho Department of Water Resources in Boise, ID.  The meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. on Monday.

For directions and/or NetMeeting connections, please contact Genna Ashley at (208) 287-4880 genna.ashley@idwr.idaho.gov

***Subject to change before meeting***

The meeting concluded at approximately 3:15p.m.