Survey to assess the need for scenario-based ecosystem m

Questionnaire from: NOAA National Ocean Service, National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science 
OMB Control No. 0648­xxxx Expiration Date: xx/xx/xxxx 

Responding to this questionnaire is entirely voluntary.  

This questionnaire is meant to to gather information and assess the need for scenario­based ecosystem models within US coastal waters and the 
Great Lakes. 
The questionnaire is actually divided into two parts ­ one for agency directors/managers to assess the need for models used in developing scenarios 
and/or current use of such models and one for agency staff who may be applying existing models in­house or who may be directing or overseeing 
outside consultants or vendors who are applying models for the agency. 
If you are a director/manager we would appreciate it if you could take the time to fill­out this questionnaire. If you agency is currently using models 
or has used models in the past, we would appreciate it if you would also forward this questionnaire to the appropriate staff member who is or has 
applied the model(s) and/or who has managed outside consultants or vendors in the application of the model(s) for your agency. 

1. Please enter your name and the agency/organization that you work for
Name:
Agency/Organization:
State:

6

2. Please respond if you are a director/manager or staff member
j Director/Manager
k
l
m
n
j Staff
k
l
m
n

3. Is your role or the role of your agency to make regulatory/policy decisions or to provide
or to make recommendations to other regulatory or policy making groups, i.e., would you
consider yourself a regulatory/policy manager or a natural resources manager?
j Regulatory/Policy Manager
k
l
m
n

j Natural Resources Manager
k
l
m
n

4. What is your spatial domain (i.e., specific estuary(ies), coastal regions or Great Lakes) of
decisions?
5
6  

5. What issues (eutrophication, toxics, fisheries, etc.) are you concerned with? (Please
check as many Issues as are appropriate and rank order of importance)
c Eutrophication
d
e
f
g

c Seagrasses
d
e
f
g

c Hypoxia/Anoxia
d
e
f
g

c Wetlands
d
e
f
g

c HABs
d
e
f
g

c Benthic Habitat
d
e
f
g

c Fisheries
d
e
f
g
c Toxics
d
e
f
g

c Pathogens/Shellfish
d
e
f
g

c Pathogens/Recreational Contact
d
e
f
g

Other (please specify) 

6. What indicators or end­points (HABs, hypoxia, fish body burden, regulatory drivers, etc.)
tend to inform or drive your decisions? (Please fill­in as many indicators/end­points that
correspond to Question 3 as appropriate)
c Regulatory drivers (ex. WQ standards, TMDLs, etc.)
d
e
f
g
c Summer average chlorophyll­a
d
e
f
g
c Annual average chlorophyll­a
d
e
f
g
c HAB biomass
d
e
f
g

c Submerged aquatic vegetation or seagrasses
d
e
f
g
c Benthic abundance/diversity
d
e
f
g

c Fisheries yield/catch
d
e
f
g

c Hypoxia/anoxia
d
e
f
g

c Fish body burden
d
e
f
g

c Beach closure days
d
e
f
g

Others (please specify as many as appropriate) 

7. Who is influenced by your decision? (Please check all appropriate boxes)
c Other Government regulators and planners
d
e
f
g
c Municipalities/Counties (NPDES)
d
e
f
g

c Municipal Dischargers
d
e
f
g
c Industrial Dischargers
d
e
f
g

c Landowners
d
e
f
g

c Farmers
d
e
f
g

c Fishermen
d
e
f
g

Other(s) (please specify) 

8. How are these different people or groups affected by the decisions you make? For
example, Does the decision result in the development of a TMDL? Does it influence permit
limits for a discharger? (Please check boxes as appropriate)
c TMDL
d
e
f
g

c Shellfish harvesting
d
e
f
g

c Permitting or permit limits
d
e
f
g
c Fisheries catch limitations
d
e
f
g
Other (please specify) 

c Beach closures
d
e
f
g

9. Now that I have a better understanding of how you make decisions, what is the time
frame that is assessed under the decision making process, i.e., Is the time frame annual or
seasonal as might be used when considering fisheries yield ­or­ might it be daily as might
be used when considering attainment of a dissolved oxygen water quality standard?
c Annual
d
e
f
g

c Seasonal
d
e
f
g

c Monthly
d
e
f
g
c Weekly
d
e
f
g

c Daily
d
e
f
g

10. What is the spatial scale of your decisions? Is it local, statewide, regional or multi­
jurisdictional? (Check all that apply)
c Regional
d
e
f
g

c State­wide
d
e
f
g
c Local
d
e
f
g

c Multi­jurisdictional
d
e
f
g

11. Are there other agencies or team members that assist in making the decision?

j Yes
k
l
m
n

j No
k
l
m
n

If "Yes" would you please specify who 

12. What factors/variables (examples: monitoring data, compliance with water quality
standards, fisheries yield, demographics, climate change, etc.) do you consider or
evaluate when you are making a decision about XYZ? (Please check all that apply)
c Monitoring data
d
e
f
g

c Compliance with WQS
d
e
f
g
c Fisheries yield
d
e
f
g

c Climate change
d
e
f
g

c Demographic trends
d
e
f
g
Other (please specify) 

13. Are models being used to inform or guide the decision? If so, could you please explain
how they are being used in the decision process, e.g., TMDL, as part of a weight of
evidence approach, etc.

j Yes
k
l
m
n

j No
k
l
m
n

Please explain 

14. What types of models (empirical/statistical, process­based/mechanistic) are being
used?
c Empirical/statistical
d
e
f
g

c Process­based/mechanistic
d
e
f
g

c Mixed (Empirical/Statistical ­ Process­
d
e
f
g
based/mechanistic) 

15. If you replied "multi­jurisdictional" to Question 8, then are there any constraints or
issues (ex. two states sharing a waterbody, but with different water quality standards for
the constituent of interest) for use of the model? If so please describe

16. What level of funding was required for model development, including
calibration/confirmation vs. other funding required for data collection/ monitoring? (total
costs for model development and total costs for data collection/monitoring used in
support of the model development)
Funding for model 

don't know

less than $50k

$50k­$100k

$100k ­ $250k

$250k ­ $500k

>$500k

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

development ($)
Funding for data 
collection/monitoring ($)

17. How do these costs, including the costs of scenario evaluation, compare to the
expected cost for implementing the scenario(s) being considered (i.e., construction, BMP
implementation, remediation, O&M, etc.)?
First, the costs of scenario evaluation.
Don't know
Costs for data collection and 
model calibration/ 
validation/scenario 
evaluation (Total $)

j
k
l
m
n

Less than $100k $100k ­ $250k

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

$250k ­ $500k

$500k ­ $1M

$1m ­ $10M

>$10m

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

18. Second, the costs of the expected cost for implementing the scenario(s) being
considered.
One time implementation 

Don't know

Less than $500k

$500k ­ $1M

$1M­$10M

$10M­$50M

$50M­$100M

>$100M

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

costs, e.g., construction, 
remediation, BMP 
implementation (Total $)
If appropriate: Annual costs 
for O&M, compliance 
monitoring, etc. (assumming 
20­year service life) ($/year)

19. Is the model or are the models still continuing to be run or used?

j Yes
k
l
m
n
j No
k
l
m
n

If Yes, briefly explain 

20. What level of annual funding is required to support the execution of the model for
scenarios vs. funding for data collection?
Funding for model 

Don't know

Less than $10k

$10k ­ $50k

$50k ­ $100k

$100k ­ $250k

>$250k

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

execution ($/year)
Funding for data collection 
($/year)

21. What type of infrastructure or computer platform (ex. in­house server farm, desktop or
laptop PC, external IT­service, etc.) is in place to run the model?

22. Do you have a need for a model(s) used to develop and evaluate scenarios?

j Yes
k
l
m
n

j No
k
l
m
n

23. What are the issues or variables of interest are important to your region or spatial
domain that such a model would need to address (hypoxia vs. fisheries vs. toxic
contaminants, etc.)? (Please identify issues/variables)
c Eutrophication
d
e
f
g

c Hypoxia/Anoxia
d
e
f
g

c Submerged aquatic vegetation or seagrasses
d
e
f
g

c Benthic habitat
d
e
f
g

c HABs
d
e
f
g

c Toxics
d
e
f
g

c Pathogens/Shellfish
d
e
f
g

c Fisheries
d
e
f
g

c Pathogens/Recreational Contact
d
e
f
g

Others (please specify) 

24. Please describe your assessment of how such a model would or would not benefit
your scenario­based management goals.

25. Are there funds and/or resources available for process­based/mechanistic modeling
versus empirically­based models?

j Yes
k
l
m
n

j No
k
l
m
n

26. Do you have an interest in in­house capabilities versus external providers such as
consultants / NOAA / USGS / USEPA / etc.?
c Interest in In­house capabilities
d
e
f
g

c Interest in external providers
d
e
f
g

27. Was the existing model developed, calibrated/confirmed and/or implemented in­house
or by an outside consultant/vendor?
j In­house
k
l
m
n

j Outside consultant/vendor
k
l
m
n

28. Is the model being run or exercised internally or by a consultant/vendor?
j Internally
k
l
m
n

j Consultant/Vendor
k
l
m
n

29. What type of infrastructure/budget is available to run or exercise the model?
Infrastructure
Infrastructure / Budget ($/yr)

6

Budget

6

30. What level of total funding was required for data collection to calibrate/validate the
model?
j Don't know
k
l
m
n

j Less than $50k
k
l
m
n
j $50k­$100k
k
l
m
n

j $100k­$250k
k
l
m
n
j $250k­$500k
k
l
m
n
j $500k­$1M
k
l
m
n
j >$1M
k
l
m
n

31. Over how many years did this expenditure take place (i.e., how many years of data
were collected)?
j 1 year or less
k
l
m
n

j 1­2 years
k
l
m
n

j 3­5 years
k
l
m
n

j 5­10 years
k
l
m
n
j > 10 years
k
l
m
n

32. Are additional data collection efforts being conducted to support the model?

j Yes
k
l
m
n

j No
k
l
m
n

33. Are these data collection efforts being conducted to support additional model
confirmation?

j Yes
k
l
m
n

j No
k
l
m
n

34. Are these additional data collection efforts being used to support a model being used
in adaptive managment mode?

j Yes
k
l
m
n

j No
k
l
m
n

35. What is the level of funding being provided to support the addtional data collection?
j Don't know
k
l
m
n

j Less than $10k/yr
k
l
m
n

j $10k­50k/yr
k
l
m
n

j $50k­$100k/yr
k
l
m
n

36. Is the model proprietary?

j Yes
k
l
m
n

j No
k
l
m
n

j >$100k/yr
k
l
m
n

37. Will the model be used in an adaptive management process?

j Yes
k
l
m
n

j No
k
l
m
n

38. How often and over what time period might you need to use or exercise the model in
the adaptive management process?
How often (times/year)
Time period (e.g., 1year, 2 
years, etc.)

39. Was the model developed and used for more than one round of management
application (e.g., adaptive management mode)?
c One round only
d
e
f
g

c Adaptive Management
d
e
f
g

40. Do you think that the model could be easily transferred or applied to another similar
waterbody within your region or geographic area?

j Yes
k
l
m
n

j No
k
l
m
n

41. Has the model been applied to another waterbody within your region or geographic
area?

j Yes
k
l
m
n

j No
k
l
m
n

42. How successful was the new application?
Degree of success

Not successful

Limited success

Moderately successful

Very successful

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

j
k
l
m
n

43. What are the expected management actions or controlling factors (load reductions,
physical alterations to the system, climate change, etc.) that the current model considers?
(Please check all appropriate boxes)
c Load reductions
d
e
f
g

c Physical alterations
d
e
f
g
Other (please specify) 

c Fisheries restrictions
d
e
f
g

c Climate change
d
e
f
g

44. What are the expected management actions or controlling factors (load reductions,
physical alterations to the system, climate change, etc.) that a future model (if needed) will
need to consider? (If a future model is not envisioned, please check N/A, otherwise, please
check boxes as appropriate)
c N/A
d
e
f
g

c Load reductions
d
e
f
g

c Physical alterations
d
e
f
g

c Fisheries restrictions
d
e
f
g
c Climate change
d
e
f
g

Other (please specify) 

45. What are the key model outputs (variables) that are needed and how do they need to
be summarized and presented (graphical, tabular) to your management team?
Key model outputs 
(variables)
Presentation materials 
(graphical, tabular, etc.)

46. If presentations are to be made to the public, what are the key model outputs
(variables) that are needed and how do they need to be summarized and presented
(graphical, tabular) to the public?
Key model outputs 
(variables)
Presentation materials 
(graphical, tabular, etc.)

47. What are the relevant spatial (small tributary, estuary, coastal waters)and temporal
scales (daily, seasonal, yearly, etc.) of interest?
Spatial scale
Temporal scale

48. What is the uncertainty or error tolerance required of a model (e.g., for DO, is
acceptable error 10%, 20% or 50%?) before deciding whether to implement a management
action or not?
j Don't know
k
l
m
n
j <10%
k
l
m
n

j 10­20%
k
l
m
n
j 20­30%
k
l
m
n
j 30­40%
k
l
m
n
j 40­50%
k
l
m
n

j Not important ­ model being used in a weight of evidence approach
k
l
m
n

49. What types of tools (post­processing, graphical presentations) are available or being
used?
c Post­processing capabilities self­contained within the model GUI
d
e
f
g
c Model prepares NetCDF compatible output files
d
e
f
g
c Model prepares Matlab compatible output files
d
e
f
g

c Model prepares ArcGIS Explorer (or TatukGIS) compatible files
d
e
f
g
c Modeling package contains appropriate post­processing tools
d
e
f
g
c Internally developed post­processing tools
d
e
f
g

Other (please specify) 

50. Do you have more or equal confidence in empirical/statistical models vs. process­
based/mechanistic models? What about a combination of empirical/statistical and
process­based/mechanistic models?
j Empirical/statistical models
k
l
m
n

j process­based/mechanistic models
k
l
m
n

j Equal confidence in both empirical/statistical and process­based/mechanistic models
k
l
m
n

j A combination of empirical/statistical and process­based/mechanistic models approach
k
l
m
n

51. Do you see a value in model hindcasting as a means of improving confidence in the
model? By this we mean testing the model's ability to simulate previously observed
system responses to changing conditions (e.g., nutrient load reductions, extreme storm
events, protracted droughts).

j Yes
k
l
m
n

j No
k
l
m
n

52. Are there any other thoughts or comments that you might wish to provide at this time?

53. We very much appreciate your taking the time to participate in this data gathering effort
as well as the time that you spent in filling out our questionnaire. This information will be
compiled and used to develop a "white paper" on national needs for scenario­based
ecosystem models for the nation's coastal waters and the Great Lakes and will also be
used to inform a future workship focusing on this issue.
We now have one final question for you ...
Would you like to be kept informed as to the progress of this study? If so, would you be
interested in participating in the national workshop if it is convenient to your schedule?

j Yes
k
l
m
n

j No
k
l
m
n

Confidentiality and PRA Statements: 

Responses will not be reported individually, only in aggregate. Individual names will not be placed on completed surveys or subsequent reports. A 
summary of results will be used by the Project Team in the development of their recommendations. A summary of the aggregate results will also be 
made available to participants at a workshop in FY14. 

Notwithstanding any other provisions of the law, no person is required to respond to, nor shall any person be subjected to a penalty for failure to 
comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act, unless that collection of information displays a 
currently valid OMB Control Number.  

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average twenty (20) minutes 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. Please send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other suggestions for reducing this burden to Laurie Golden, NOAA 
National Ocean Service, National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science ([email protected]).