go to chapters:
1. Overview
2. Study Area Description
3. Geomorphology and Sediment Cones
4. Environmental Resources
5.Problems and Opportunities
6. Recommendations
7. References
8. Appendices

Chapter 8 : Appendices

Appendix A
Observation Notes on Sediment Cones

• FID 0 (US) shows up upstream of the tributary confluence. This could simply be due to the GIS resolution. Not clear on the meaning of the note “The flow has been assisted, not natural.” Braided tributary appearance. “Low” activity designation.
• FID 1 (Mexico) “High” activity designation - Tributary much more confined than FID 0’s braided planform. ‘Pushing’ mainstem planform.
• FID 48 (US) “High” activity designation - Tributary much more confined than FID 0’s braided planform. Not indicating mainstem planform influence.
• FID 2 (Mexico) “High” activity designation -. Appears (visually) to be large flow contributor, based on channel width (as compared with mainstem). Additionally, the mainstem appears to widen downstream of this tributary, and the mainstem’s abrupt angles suggest this tributary exhibits considerable influence on the mainstem’s alignment. More confined tributary planform like previous.
• {Major Mexico tributary between FID 2 and FID 3 appears to exhibit considerable influence on mainstem alignment.}
• FID 3 (Mexico) “Medium” activity designation - More confined planform.
• FID 4 (Mexico) “High” activity designation - Appears (graphically) to influence mainstem alignment considerably. Notes support this.
• FID 5 (US) “Medium” activity designation - Deposition area located (per GIS) away from mainstem channel. Very narrow tributary channel(s).
• FID 55 (US) “High” activity designation - Tributary channel very straight alignment appears (visually) to be very deep canyon. Notes indicate long term deposition trend (older deposits vegetated). Could be exhibiting base-level lowering planform impacts (outside of mainstem bend).
• FID 6 (Mexico) “Medium” activity designation - There is no apparent tributary associated with this marker (appears visually to be a ridge/rib). Curious.
• FID 7 (Mexico) “High” activity designation - Apparent large flow contributor with well-developed fan. Wide tributary channel (compared to mainstem). Perennial?    
• FID 8 (Mexico) “Low” activity designation - Ill-defined channel planform, braided.
• FID 10 (US) “Low” activity designation - Apparent small (relatively) drainage area.
• FID 9 (Mexico) “Low” activity designation - Very small drainage area. Appears to be associated with old mainstem channel ‘scar’ (avulsion?). Visually apparent fan, located far from mainstem active channel. Little impact to mainstem anticipated.
• FID 11 (US) “Medium” activity designation - Classic fan deposits with numerous apparent flow paths. Appears (visually) to potentially be a big contributor – mainstem channel located on opposite edge of vegetated meander band, drains visually dissimilar landforms.
• FID 54 (Mexico) “Medium” activity designation - Tributary appears to have ‘captured’ a smaller adjacent tributary. Does not appear to be capable of much impact on mainstem.
• FID 12 (Mexico) “Medium” activity designation - Mainstem meander pattern becomes noticeably more sinuous downstream of this tributary. Drains a fairly large area with apparently steep upland.
• FID 13 (US) “Low” activity designation - No apparent significant tributary drainage associated with this point. Appears to be a mainstem channel scar/secondary flow path.
• FID 14 (Mexico) “Medium” activity designation - This one, too, appears to be a mainstem channel scar, though there is a right-bank (Mexico) tributary coming in adjacent to it.
• {Significant (perennial?) tributary comes in on right-bank (Mexico) between FID 14 and FID 15.}
• {Mainstem appears very anastomosed in this stretch, as well. Lots of scars, oxbows, etc.}
• FID 15 (US) “High” activity designation - Very large braided tributary (FID 16 also part of this terminus) system. Appears to be exhibiting significant influence on mainstem channel alignment (significant sinuosity increase in mainstem adjacent to/downstream of this point). This area appears quite active.
• FID 16 (US) “Medium” activity designation - Oxbow/cutoff on mainstem. Appears associated with large braided tributary (see FID 15). In fact, this location appears to coincide with primary tributary flowpath.
• FID 17 (US) “Medium” activity designation - Oxbow/cutoff on mainstem. No defined tributary associated with this point – could be associated with nearby center-pivot irrigation (return flow?), but more probably tied to above large braided tributary, historically.
• {Mainstem channel vegetated meander band becomes noticeably narrow downstream of the large tributary described above.}
• {Upstream of FID 18, the mainstem channel meander band becomes considerably wider and exhibits extensive channel scarring. Apparent high groundwater level, with visibility open water in old scars, oxbows. This GW level could be associated with extensive agricultural development adjacent to the floodway in this area.}
• FID 18 (US?) “Med’ activity designation - No tributary associated with this point. The mainstem floodway is decidedly narrow for a short reach in this area – ‘bottleneck’.
• {The mainstem channel becomes extremely difficult to distinguish, with lots of scarring, between FID 18 and FID 49. Very wide vegetated meander band.}         (return to table of contents)
• FID 49 (US) “Low” activity designation - Fairly large drainage-area, likely low gradient tributary enters. Old fan visible seems to exhibit impact on mainstem alignment.
• FID 19 (Mexico) “High” activity designation - Presumably (photography cuts off) small drainage area tributary apparently causing a localized meander.
• FID 20 (Mexico) “High” activity designation - Another localized meander, very similar in appearance to FID 19, but the arroyo fan shape does not support the kind of concentrated deposition expected by this feature. Could be formed by old mainstem channel scar.
• {Large left-bank tributary (perennial?) enters on US side between FID 20 and FID 21. Exhibits strong influence on mainstem planform.}
• FID 21 (Mexico) “High” activity designation - Right-bank tributary enters just upstream and a depositional feature appears visible in the mainstem where it enters. But the above noted large left-bank tributary seems to exhibit much more influence on this reach of the mainstem. Could be some combination of the two.
• FID 22 (Mexico) “High” activity designation - Pronounced localized mainstem meander. Left-bank tributary enters in this area, but appears to join the mainstem too far downstream of this feature to have caused it (recently anyway). There is another, presumably man-made feature that seems to be related to this meander. Visually, it could be a roadway or, perhaps an irrigation canal. If it’s a roadway, the arroyo crossing could have become plugged and laterally shifted the flowpath during an event. If the latter, this meander could have resulted from a breach of the canal. Curious.
• FID 47 (Mexico) “High” activity designation - Larger right-bank tributary enters from Mexico side in this area (about this point and FID 23 define the fan). This one appears to be the more secondary flowpath (compared with FID 23) but, together, this tributary appears to be shifting the mainstem alignment significantly.
• FID 23 (Mexico) “High” activity designation - The apparent primary flowpath of this braided tributary. Probable high sediment contributor.
• FID 24 (Mexico) “Medium” activity designation - Right-bank tributary enters where mainstem has “button-hooked” up-valley.
• FID 26 (US) “Medium” activity designation - Apparently, an abandoned historic primary tributary channel. Presumably functions as a secondary channel during high flows.
• FID 25 (US) “High” activity designation - The presumed main flowpath of this left-bank tributary. Multiple middle bars (vegetated?) seen in mainstem channel at this outlet.
• FID 27 (?) “High” activity designation - Visually, appears to be the convergence point of a number of mainstem channel braids. There does not appear to be a tributary associated with this point. The mainstem channel is visibly braided/anastomosed upstream of this point, and tortuously sinuous downstream.
• FID 28 (Mexico?) “High” activity designation - This appears to be associated with a ‘cut-off’ of a pronounced meander bend, and a significant braided tributary entering from the south (Mexico).
• {The mainstem channel changes from tortuously sinuous to conspicuously straight (man-made?) between FID 28 and FID 50.}
• FID 50 (Mexico) “High” activity designation - Apparent relatively small tributary.
• FID 51 (Mexico) “High” activity designation - At downstream of significant low-sinuosity (straight) mainstem segment. Apparently influencing mainstem alignment.                      (return to table of contents)
• FID 29 (Mexico) “High” activity designation - Significant drainage-area, braided (multi-path) tributary enters from Mexican side.
• FID 30 (US) “High” activity designation - This appears to be the confluence of a significant (perennial?) tributary.
• FID 31 (?) “High” activity designation - No tributary associated with this sediment feature. Appears graphically to be a point bar/meander formation.
• FID 33 (Mexico) “Medium” activity designation - Right-bank tributary enters here, but this point also appears to be an unusual apparent alternative flow path exit for FID 32.
• Increased sinuosity on mainstem.
• FID 32 (Mexico) “Medium” activity designation - Notes state “Obvious vegetation disturbance. This point is marked in the ‘fan’ of the tributary, away from the mainstem channel. Not sure the relationship to sedimentation.
• FID 34 (US) “Medium” activity designation - Left-bank tributary enters, with visually obvious alternating bars within the mainstem downstream of the confluence.
• FID 35 (US) “High” activity designation - Tributary confluence.
• FID 36 (US) “Medium” activity designation - Small, left-bank tributary that does not appear to make it to the mainstem. The drainage of this tributary is extremely small – minimal influence on mainstem morphology would be expected from this one. Notes state “Pretty thin sediment deposition” (not surprisingly based on drainage area) or this deposition could be from flow escape from mainstem.                     
• Mainstem meanders become tortuous, sometimes heading apparently up-valley.
• Mainstem exhibits some exceedingly straight reaches.
• FID 37 (Mexico) “High” activity designation - Tributary enters on river right – entry path makes a significant down-valley deviation before entering the mainstem (probable mainstem planform change in the past – there appears to be a faint channel ‘scar’ within the floodplain). Point or middle bar appears (atypically) on the mainstem at this confluence).
• FID 38 (US) “Medium” activity designation - A large, braided tributary enters from river left. The confluence is a broad ‘fan’ with numerous secondary flow paths. Depositional area marked where the primary flow path enters the dense mainstem floodplain vegetation.
• FID 52 (Mexico) “Low” activity designation - Another tributary enters on river right – with a similar entry path down-valley deviation before entering the mainstem (probable mainstem planform change in the past – there appears another channel ‘scar’ within the floodplain), similar to FID 37.
• The mainstem meander belt has become significantly wider, crossing to the other side of the valley vegetation numerous times.
• FID 39 (Mexico?) “High” activity designation - This point is located near an apparent outlet of the right bank tributary, but it is not clear from the photography if this (excavated?) path is associated with the arroyo or a river-bend ‘cut-off’.
• FID 40 (Mexico) “High” activity designation - A right bank tributary enters in this vicinity, and one of two visible flow paths (secondary) enters the mainstem here. A tell-tale deposition fan shows its influence on the mainstem planform.
• FID 41 (Mexico) “High” activity designation - A right bank tributary enters in this vicinity, and one of two visible flow paths (primary) enters the mainstem here. A more significant deposition fan is seen here on the mainstem.
• FID 42 (US) “High” activity designation - Left-bank tributary enters here. The tributary appears to have a substantially wide active channel. Deposition is marked right at the confluence, past the apparently narrowed (by vegetation) arroyo channel. There is another mainstem point bar upstream from here, apparently an abandoned (secondary?) arroyo flow path.
• FID 43 (Mexico) “High” activity designation - A right-bank tributary crosses the floodplain vegetation, in a surprisingly straight (levee-confined?) manner, and enters the mainstem here. The RG channel shows a number of point/middle bars immediately downstream from this point. The apparent confinement of the tributary entrance, with associated increase in maintained energy, probably results in higher sediment delivery at this point.
• FID 44 (US) “High” activity designation - Left bank tributary enters the mainstem, which has meandered up-valley, here with attendant mainstem deposition features (middle/point bars) visible.
• Large water body appears on river right of the mainstem. The adjacent flow path features indicate this area is quite saturated.
• FID 45 (Mexico) “Medium” activity designation - Right bank tributary enters here; apparently contributing significant sediment based on the visual indications in the mainstem and, perhaps, a fair amount of water (the mainstem channel width appears noticeably wider downstream).
• FID 46 (US) “Medium” activity designation - The left bank tributary here appears to have changed its primary delivery point numerous times, based on the photography. There appears a substantial ‘delta’ at this point, delineated on either side by visible flow paths, as well as an historic confluence upstream some distance on the mainstem.
• FID 53 (US) “High” activity designation - Left bank tributary enters here, and a point bar appears to be building/enlarging downstream of the confluence.
• The mainstem becomes severely confined downstream of FID 53 to the point where a major tributary enters from the Mexican side. This latter tributary results in at least a four-fold increase in the visible mainstem channel width.
  
  (return to table of contents)
  

The Center for Space Research (CSR) presents a brief narrative describing our map compilation procedures, with references to more detailed technical information included in the project deliverables. We include a table summarizing feature counts and acreages, as appropriate. The summary information concludes with a brief section on project findings.

Map Compilation Procedures

Subtask B1: Project Area Definition

CSR delineated the study area for the Forgotten River Watershed Management project. The boundary file consists of a 3-km buffer surrounding the main channel centerline of the Forgotten River Reach of the Rio Grande from Fort Quitmanin Hudspeth County to Presidio, Texas. CSR used a Euclidean allocation process and other ArcGIS Spatial Analyst functions to eliminate areas within the buffer zone that exceeded the river channel base elevation level by 32.8 feet.

More information about this dataset may be found in the readme.txt file in the Project_Area directory and the metadata that accompany the dataset. All CSR-generated metadata are compliant with Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) standards.

Subtask B2: Scanning of National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Mylar Sheets

CSR scanned and geo-referenced seven National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) 1:100,000 and 1:24,000 scale Mylar sheets. The NWI maps were geo-referenced to the USGS Digital Raster Graphics (DRG) topographic maps. CSR created FGDC-compliant metadata for the raster GeoTIFF files. Some areas in the 1:100k scale NWI maps did not aligned well with the comparison datasets after geo-referencing. A shapefile called ref_errors.shp includes circles denoting areas of misalignment in the study region only.

After geo-referencing, each NWI map was subset within the study area. CSR reclassified the subsets into bi-level (two class) images to prepare the data for vectorization. Polygons were selected from an auto-generated line vector, edited if necessary, and placed in a polygon shapefile. Additional polygon and point vectors were created manually. The majority of the line features were selected from polygon features and placed in the line vector because the river (line feature) often formed the boundary for many polygon features. Features that consisted of less than 20 pixels were converted to points and placed into a point shapefile. Only features falling within the defined project area were vectorized. Each feature was attributed with its corresponding NWI code or codes (CODE_1 and CODE_2), the locational error status (REF_ERROR), and the source map name and scale (SOURCE). There are 81 NWI point features, 1,285 NWI line features, and 941 NWI polygon features.

A detailed account of the Subtask B2 procedures may be found in the PDF document called Procedures_MylarScans.pdf.

Subtask B4: Geospatial Data Search and Retrieval for the US side of the Rio Grande

a. Impaired river segments
CSR extracted four impaired Rio Grande line segments from the TCEQ Stream Segments 2004 dataset. The impaired river attributes were assigned to this shapefile from the DRAFT 2004 Texas 303(d) List (May 13, 2005). The attribute field descriptions are listed in this document under Explanation of Column Headings. The vector line work used for the shapefile was constructed from the 24k scale National Hydrography Dataset.

More information about the impaired river segments dataset may be found in the readme.txt file in the Impaired_River directory and the FGDC-compliant metadata that accompany the dataset.

b. Arroyo confluences
CSR identified 56 point features representing arroyo confluences, also referred to as sediment cones, from the visual inspection of 1- and 2-meter aerial imagery acquired during three different time periods: 2005, 2004, and the mid-1990s. Each sediment cone point in the shapefile was collected in the center and at the furthest reach of deposition activity. CSR assigned each point a level of sediment deposition activity. The three levels are low, medium, and high. The "Note" section in the shapefile's attribute table further describes the arroyo confluences such as size of affected area or direction the main channel was pushed.

More information about this dataset may be found in the readme.txt file in the Arroyos directory and the FGDC-compliant metadata that accompany the dataset.

c. Pumping sites and diversion dams
CSR located three pumping stations in the study area. Two were digitized from the early 1970s 24k scale topographic Digital Raster Graphics (DRGs). The third pumping site, located in Mexico, was determined by visual inspection of 1- and 2-meter aerial imagery acquired during three different time periods: 2005, 2004, and the mid-1990s.

The remaining 14 points in the shapefile represent locations of diversion dams. CSR determined these locations from a scanned document called Distances along Rio Grande.pdf provided by the IBWC. As stated at the top of the document, these feature locations were established from the international boundary maps approved by the commission in minute no. 253, September 23, 1976.

More information about the pumping sites and diversion dam’s dataset may be found in the readme.txt file in the Pump_Sites_Diver_Dams directory and the FGDC-compliant metadata that accompany the dataset.

d. Groundwater depth monitoring wells
CSR extracted 121 groundwater monitoring wells from the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) Groundwater Database Reports. A text file called Well Data Table was used to compile the well ID, latitude, longitude, coordinate accuracy information, and reporting agency from each of the three counties that fall in the study area: Hudspeth, Jeff Davis, and Presidio. The well data from each county were then merged into one shapefile. The TWDB Well Data Table contains many more attribute fields, and the other Groundwater Database Reports have additional information about each well. These text files may be linked to the shapefile by state_well_number. The TWDB groundwater metadata are found in the Ground-Water Data System Dictionary.

More information about this dataset may be found in the readme.txt file in the Groundwater_Wells directory and the FGDC-compliant metadata that accompany the dataset.             (return to table of contents)

e. Land ownership
The primary land ownership dataset represents land ownership polygons that intersect the Forgotten River Reach  study area. The secondary land ownership dataset includes the land ownership polygons that intersect the 3-km buffer study area but do not fall on the defined study area. CSR extracted the majority of the land ownership polygons in both shapefiles from the Original Texas Land Survey (OTLS) digital data published by the Railroad Commission of Texas (RRC). One polygon in the primary shapefile was extracted from the Texas Parks and Wildlife (TPWD) state parks dataset. Mexico land ownership status information was not available to CSR. The non-US polygons cover the Mexican side of the study area and were constructed from the Forgotten River project area shapefiles. CSR did not locate any US Federal lands in the Forgotten River study area.

In the primary area of interest, there are 314 polygon features representing the boundaries of privately owned land, eight polygon features for state owned land, and one polygon feature for non-US land. There are 248 polygon features representing privately owned land, three polygon features representing state owned land, and one polygon feature representing non-US land in the secondary area of interest.

More information about these datasets may be found in the readme.txt file in the Land_Ownership directory and the FGDC-compliant metadata that accompany each dataset.

f. Land cover
NLCD 1992
CSR assessed the accuracy of the U.S. Geological Survey 1992 National Land Cover Database (NLCD) within the Forgotten River study area to determine the reliability of the dataset. The accuracy assessment method used by CSR was chosen as a reasonable and rapid way to test the NLCD. The method was designed to test the product’s currency and suitability for mapping primarily cropland, rangeland, woody vegetation, and wetlands at the present time. Aerial imagery collected during the 2004/2005 time frame was used as the main source of reference data. CSR performed the accuracy assessment on the 1992 NLCD image pixels that fell in the defined study area only. A stratified random sample of 20 points per class was generated. These 240 points were assigned class values from the NLCD within a 3x3 window size using a majority threshold value of 3. All 240 points were labeled (referenced) with one of 12 NLCD classes based on the visual inspection and photo-interpretation of 1- and 2-meter aerial imagery that were typically viewed at a map scale of 1:4000.

The overall classification accuracy was 32.50 percent, which means that 78 of 240 CSR reference points matched the 1992 NLCD. While this number is a concise measurement, it is more useful to evaluate the level of accuracy for each class in order to understand each category’s performance or error contribution. By constructing an error matrix of the classified data against the reference data, producer’s and user’s accuracy percentages were calculated for each class. CSR discovered that none of the 1992 NLCD classes are very reliable for the Forgotten River Reach study area. Each one has a different level or degree of accuracy. In general, the most useful classes for the project goals are a combined Forest class, the Shrubland class, and possibly the Row Crop and Pasture/Hay classes in the southern part of the study area only.

CSR determined that the NLCD 1992 dataset is an unreliable representation of land cover for the Forgotten River Reach study and, consequently, did not calculate cover type acreages. A detailed account of the NLCD 1992 Accuracy Assessment procedures may be found in the PDF document called NLCD92_Accuracy_Assessment.pdf in the NLCD_1992 subdirectory of the Land_Cover directory.
                                                                                              (return to table of contents)
Vegetation mapping
CSR produced two vegetation cover maps derived from LandSat 7 Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus (ETM+) data collected on November 9 and 16, 2002. The first product shows the distribution of eleven land cover types: four salt cedar classes, five other vegetation classes that include agricultural areas, one developed class, and one water class. The second product maps the probability of salt cedar occurrence within the study area. The vegetation mapping data are distributed in raster (ERDAS Imagine) and vector (ESRI shapefile) data formats. Other preliminary datasets that contain the “fuzzy classifications” used to create the final products are included in the data deliverables.

CSR performed image classification using eCognition 4.0 by Definiens, an object oriented classification software. An alternate classification of data collected by the TM sensor in late fall 2003 was attempted using the SubPixel Classifier Add-on module in ERDAS Imagine. However, results were unsatisfactory, and further efforts were abandoned. The object oriented approach yielded more satisfactory results. Source satellite data included six 30-m multispectral channels and one 15-m panchromatic channel of two ETM+ datasets collected on November 9 and 16, 2002, and archived in the CSR LandSat image archive. To inform the image classification procedure, CSR staff, accompanied and assisted by TCEQ Watermasters, collected 37 GPS points and 61 polygon samples at accessible locations within the study area. As an additional input, CSR also calculated standard Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) data using the visible red and the near infrared channels of the two LandSat source datasets.

The classification was performed separately on the two source datasets. The northern ETM+ dataset is dated November 16, 2002; the southern dataset was collected on November 9 of the same year. Nearly a third of the project area was imaged on both dates as there is considerable spatial overlap. Both datasets were subset and masked using the project area boundary file. The eCognition classification procedure begins with a segmentation process that creates image objects of similar adjacent pixels based upon user-specified parameters. We used the same parameters and weights for both datasets:
• Scale parameter = 10; Shape parameter = 0.1; Color = 0.9; Smoothness = 0.5; and Compactness = 0.5.
• NDVI weight = 2; ETM+ Channels 1,3,4,7 and 8 (pan) = 1; and ETM+ Channels 2 and 5 = 0.

In the northern dataset, the segmentation process yielded 11,040 objects. In the south, the process generated a total of 14,729 objects.

The classification in eCognition was an iterative process. After segmentation, the analyst chose several samples representing possible variations of the desired classes before running an initial classification. Next the analyst improved the classification by identifying an appropriate class for unclassified objects, placing incorrectly classified samples in the correct class, and by adding new samples. The process also identified gaps in the classification scheme. Table 7 shows the initial sample counts per seven land cover classes collected in the northern region of the study area. Table 8 shows classes and samples collected for the final version of the classification.   
(return to table of contents)

Table 7 - Initial iteration of Forgotten River North classes and samples

Table 8 - Final iteration of Forgotten River North classes and samples

Tables 9 and 10 show classes identified and samples collected for the southern region of the Forgotten River Reach

Table 9 - Initial iteration of Forgotten River South classes and samples

Table 10 - Final iteration of Forgotten River South classes and samples

 CSR also mapped vegetation density based on NDVI ratio values per segmentation object. The dense vegetation criteria was a segment NDVI ratio value greater than 0.2. All segments with lower values were labeled as sparse vegetation. A similar procedure was applied to the southern and northern regions. CSR used the vegetation density maps to improve the final classification map.

In ArcMap, CSR unioned north and south project area mask shapefiles to demarcate image overlap areas. The non-overlap area of the northern segment of the Forgotten River Reach was used to subset the northern area classification. CSR performed the following procedures using ERDAS Imagine 8.7 software:
    • Subset the non-overlap area of the northern segment of the classification,
    • Recoded to nine common land cover classes in preparation for mosaicing,
    • Mosaiced the northern and southern region maps,
    • Hand-edited the overlap seam and some misclassified areas,
    • Filled a small number of data gaps,
    • Followed a similar process to mosaic vegetation density maps,
    • Constructed a model to recode classes based on vegetation density map,
    • Ran model to create final 11 classes,
    • Recoded from 11 land cover classes to four salt cedar probability classes,
    • Reprojected from UTM Zone 13 North WGS84 to UTM Zone 13 North NAD83 projection using a rigorous transformation,
    • Updated attribute tables, and
    • Exported attribute tables, which were converted to a comma-delimited format in a text editor.

CSR used ArcGIS Spatial Analyst, ArcMap, and ArcCatalog to:
    • Convert Imagine format classifications from Raster to Vector, creating generalized and raster versions of shapefiles,
    • Join comma-delimited attribute tables to shapefiles,
    • Export new shapefiles,
    • Delete null background,
    • Recalculate area fields,
    • Create layer files for display, and
    • Generate FGDC-compliant metadata.

CSR also referenced the 2004 National Agricultural Imagery Program (NAIP) photography and other ancillary data in ArcMap during sample selection and image classification.

More information about the vegetation and land cover datasets may be found in the readme.txt file in the Vegetation_Map subdirectory of the Land_Cover directory and the FGDC-compliant metadata that accompany each dataset.

g. Structures/channelization infrastructure
CSR constructed three shapefiles of structures/channelization infrastructure including levees, drains, canals, channels, barrow pits, and one grade control structure. These data were compiled from various sources, such as IBWC GIS datasets, a scanned document from the IBWC, DRGs, and aerial imagery. There are 53 levees and one canal in the line dataset. CSR identified 13 drains, one grade control structure, one rip-rap structure, two canal headings, and two end points of channel rectification for the point shapefile. Polygon features include 129 channels and three barrow pits.

More information about these datasets may be found in the readme.txt file in the Channelization_Infrastructure directory and the FGDC-compliant metadata that accompany each dataset.

h. NRCS STATSGO Soils
CSR extracted seven soil polygons from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) State Soil Geographic (STATSGO) database for Texas. In addition to the dBase table attached to the shapefile, there are ten dBase tables that contain STATSGO attributes for the study area. These tables may be added to the shapefile table as desired. A description of each table may be found in the STATSGO metadata.

More information about the soils dataset may be found in the readme.txt file in the STATSGO_Soils directory and the FGDC-compliant metadata that accompany the dataset.

Other
CSR obtained GIS datasets from the IBWC that do not specifically fall into the Forgotten River Reach study task list. With the exception of the four gauging station point features, the data features are clustered in the northernmost and southernmost ends of the study area where channel rectification exists. There are very few descriptive attributes for most of the IBWC data.

In Presidio County, there are 3,745 line features of 1-foot contour data around the levees, 12 polygon features represent the main channel in 1940, three polygon features of the Rio Grande channel in 1967, and 10 polygon features of the Rio Grande channel in 1996. Major geologic or geomorphic surfaces comprise 15 polygon features.

In Hudspeth County, there are 2,683 line features of 1-foot contour data around the levees in the north portion and 4,390 line features of 1-foot contour data around the levees in the south portion. Major geologic or geomorphic surfaces are represented by three polygon features.

More information about these IBWC datasets may be found in the readme.txt file in the directory called Other and the FGDC-compliant metadata that accompany each dataset.

Subtask B5: Geospatial Data Exploration and Integration for Areas on the Mexican side of the Rio Grande

CSR compiled several geospatial datasets from source data obtained from the IBWC. The IBWC shared shapefiles of hydrologic and channelization infrastructure features and one document stating approximate location information of diversion dams, cities, and crossings among other topographic elements. Some features are located on the Mexican side of the study area. These data fall under tasks B4c and B4g. Under task B4c, one pumping site and one diversion dam are located on the Mexican side. For task B4g, one drain and two canal headings are located on the border, and many small channels fall on the Mexican side near the northern and southern portions of the study area.

CSR downloaded 1:50,000 scale digital elevation model (DEM) data free of charge from the Instituto Naćional de Estadistica Geografica e Informatica (National Institute of Geographic and Computer Science) (INEGI) website. The ten DEMs, in BIL (band interleaved by line) format, are separated into directories by quad name. CSR translated information about these data available on the INEGI website from Spanish to English.

There are two 1:50,000 scale vector datasets available for purchase from INEGI that are called:
1. Datos topograficos vectoriales and
2. Toponimos, also referred to as Toponimicos.

For the Forgotten River vector data quads with metadata available online, CSR translated the HTML sites from Spanish to English. CSR used an INEGI online service to investigate product availability for the Forgotten River project area. The Datos topograficos vectoriales and Toponimos datasets are available for all ten quads that intersect the study area. The Forgotten River project area vector data availability was also confirmed by an INEGI sales representative via email.

More information about the Mexican datasets may be found in the PDF document called Data_for_Mexican_side_of_ForgottenRiver.pdf.