Skip to main content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Figure 3: Comparison of three scenarios for the 3D Hydrography Program

Detailed Description

Figure 3: Comparison of three scenarios for the 3D Hydrography Program including 1) status quo, 2) derive new data from 1-meter DEMs, and 3) derive new data from 0.5-meter DEMs. The USGS vision for 3DHP is based on Scenario 2, which has consistent nationwide coverage in 9 years with approximately 200-300 million stream features, an improved data model, meets most needs, and is estimated to bring $1.047 billion in annual benefits.

 

  1. Status Quo

Features

  • Data Consistency: Data vary by steward
  • Complete refresh of National Data Coverage: NO
  • Number of Stream Features: ~26 million
  • Improved Data Model: NO
  • Major Advantage(s): Lowest cost
  • Major Challenge(s): Major needs unmet; growing inconsistency 

ANNUAL BENEFITS $658M

 

  1. Derive new data from 1-meter DEMs

Features

  • Data Consistency: Consistent nationwide coverage
  • Complete refresh of National Data Coverage: In 9 years 
  • Number of Stream Features: ~200 -300 million
  • Improved Data Model: YES
  • Major Advantage(s): Meets most needs
  • Major Challenge(s): Requires significant increased investment

ANNUAL BENEFITS $1.047B

 

  1. Derive new data from 0.5-meter DEMs

Features

  • Data Consistency: Consistent nationwide coverage
  • Complete refresh of National Data Coverage: In 9 years following nationwide acquisition of 0.5 meter DEMs
  • Number of Stream Features: ~220-330 million
  • Improved Data Model: YES
  • Major Advantage(s): Meets nearly all needs
  • Major Challenge(s):  Highest cost; source data not widely available

ANNUAL BENEFITS $1.126B

Sources/Usage

Public Domain.