Attribute_Accuracy_Report:
Attribute values at each point represent a 5 x 5 m square centered at the point. The values are compiled from multiple sources. The following method was used to validate attribute accuracy: symbolized display of point attribute values overlaid for each raster dataset followed by overlaying point data over each raster to confirm spot checks for data and topological accuracy using ArcGIS Pro version 2.0. These checks were performed by at least one of the authors. Mean high-water (MHW) shoreline position and dune metric (foredune crest and dune toe position and elevation) accuracy depend on the accuracy of the source data (Doran and others, 2017). Distances to foredune crest and dune toe positions were only considered when they occurred within 200 m of a point. Where these metrics exceeded this distance NoData values (-99999) were used.
These datasets consist of data compiled from multiple sources and are aggregated spatially. The data were reviewed by the authors using standard USGS review procedures. No checks for topological consistency beyond those described in the Attribute Accuracy Report were performed on these data. The primary vertical datum used is NAVD88, the same as the source datasets, lidar and geomorphology points (e.g. shoreline, dune crest, and dune toe). Some fields (those with a 'mhw' suffix and explained in the Entity and Attribute section) include the elevation adjusted to the mean high water (MHW) datum calculated by Weber and others (2005) for the area. Where a given attribute value could not be calculated due to lack of input data in the source dataset, a NoData value of -99999 was recorded for the attribute.
Dataset completeness is dependent on the completeness of the source data. Points exist where seabeach amaranth presence for the given year (2014) are observed. Additional randomly distrubuted points are added to the dataset following previous species distribution model research (see Gutierrez and Lentz [2023] for citations), allowing detailed geomorphic characteristics to be sampled where plants occur as well as at random point locations across the island.
Source_Information:
Source_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Assateague Island National Seashore
Publication_Date: 20200511
Title: ASISMDCoverMap19932014
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: vector digital map
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Berlin, Maryland
Publisher: Assateague Island National Seashore
Other_Citation_Details:
This file contains the “over-sand vehicle” or OSV beach habitat (the zone where driving is allowed on the beach) for 2013, the North End habitat for 2014, the July 2014 shoreline, and the 1993 vegetation map for the rest of Assateague Island. The data were requested and sent directly to the USGS via email from the National Park Service. The data are projected in NAD UTM Zone 18N. The data were requested and sent directly to the USGS via email from the National Park Service.
Type_of_Source_Media: digital vector data
Source_Time_Period_of_Content:
Time_Period_Information:
Range_of_Dates/Times:
Beginning_Date: 19930101
Ending_Date: 20141231
Source_Currentness_Reference: ground condition
Source_Citation_Abbreviation: vegetation_raw
Source_Contribution:
The map data were used to extract information about the vegetation type.
Source_Information:
Source_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: NOAA
Publication_Date: 20151220
Title: 2014 NOAA NGS Topobathy Lidar DEM: Post-Sandy (SC to NY)
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: raster digital data
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Charleston, SC
Publisher: NOAA
Other_Citation_Details: Website accessed 4/27/2022.
Online_Linkage:
Online_Linkage:
Type_of_Source_Media: online
Source_Time_Period_of_Content:
Time_Period_Information:
Single_Date/Time:
Calendar_Date: 2011
Source_Currentness_Reference: publication date
Source_Citation_Abbreviation: DEM_raw
Source_Contribution: Lidar data used to extract geomorphology metrics.
Source_Information:
Source_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Kara J. Doran
Originator: Joseph W. Long
Originator: Justin J Birchler
Originator: Owen T. Brenner
Originator: Matthew W. Hardy
Originator: Karen L. M. Morgan
Originator: Hilary F. Stockdon
Originator: Miguel L. Torres
Publication_Date: 2017
Title:
Lidar-derived Beach Morphology (Dune Crest, Dune Toe, and Shoreline) for U.S. Sandy Coastlines
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: tabular digital data
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Reston, VA
Publisher: U.S. Geological Survey
Other_Citation_Details:
Affiliated datasets created using the same methods. A version of this geomorphology points dataset is available as 14CNT01_morphology.zip These data were made available to us prior to publication and as a result, processing steps may differ from what is described here. The first link is to the data release page, the second is to download a .zip file with the data used for this report. Website accessed 4/27/2022.
Online_Linkage: https://doi.org/10.5066/F7GF0S0Z
Online_Linkage:
Type_of_Source_Media: online
Source_Time_Period_of_Content:
Time_Period_Information:
Range_of_Dates/Times:
Beginning_Date: 1998
Ending_Date: 2018
Source_Currentness_Reference: ground condition
Source_Citation_Abbreviation: morphology_raw
Source_Contribution:
Lidar-derived Beach Morphology (Dune Crest, Dune Toe, and Shoreline) for U.S. Sandy Coastlines used to extract distance from morphology to sampling locations
Source_Information:
Source_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Jonathan Chase
Originator: Bill Hulslander
Originator: Mark Strum
Originator: Chris Lee
Originator: Benjamin Gutierrez
Originator: Rachel E. Henderson
Originator: Travis K. Sterne
Publication_Date: 2023
Title:
Assateague Island Seabeach Amaranth Survey Data — 2001 to 2018
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: tabular digital data
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Reston, VA
Publisher: U.S. Geological Survey
Other_Citation_Details:
Suggested citation: Chase, J., Hulslander, B., Strum, M., Lea, C., Gutierrez, B., Henderson, R.E., and Sterne T.K., 2023, Assateague Island Seabeach Amaranth Survey Data — 2001 to 2018: U.S. Geological Survey data release,
https://doi.org/10.5066/P9IZMQ1B This dataset (P9IZMQ1B) contributed to this data release (P9GKXN3H) and was released simultaneously.
Online_Linkage: https://doi.org/10.5066/P9IZMQ1B
Online_Linkage:
Type_of_Source_Media: online
Source_Time_Period_of_Content:
Time_Period_Information:
Range_of_Dates/Times:
Beginning_Date: 2001
Ending_Date: 2018
Source_Currentness_Reference: ground condition
Source_Citation_Abbreviation: field_data_raw
Source_Contribution:
Data collected by NPS from 2001 - 2018, used to identify the presence of seabeach amaranth at Assateague Island.
Source_Information:
Source_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Emily J. Sturdivant
Originator: Sara L. Zeigler
Originator: Benjamin T. Gutierrez
Originator: Kathryn M. Weber
Publication_Date: 20191220
Title:
DCpts, DTpts, SLpts: Dune crest, dune toe, and mean high water shoreline positions: Assateague Island, MD & VA, 2014
Edition: 1.0
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: vector digital data
Series_Information:
Series_Name: data release
Issue_Identification: DOI:10.5066/P9V7F6UX
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center, Woods Hole, MA
Publisher:
U.S. Geological Survey, Coastal and Marine Hazards and Resources Program
Other_Citation_Details: Website accessed 4/27/2022.
Online_Linkage: https://doi.org/10.5066/P9V7F6UX
Online_Linkage:
Larger_Work_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Emily J. Sturdivant
Originator: Sara L. Zeigler
Originator: Benjamin T. Gutierrez
Originator: Kathryn M. Weber
Publication_Date: 2019
Title:
Barrier island geomorphology and shorebird habitat metrics: Sixteen sites on the U.S. Atlantic Coast, 2013–2014
Edition: 1.0
Series_Information:
Series_Name: data release
Issue_Identification: DOI:10.5066/P9V7F6UX
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Reston, VA
Publisher: U.S. Geological Survey
Other_Citation_Details:
Suggested citation: Sturdivant, E.J., Zeigler, S.L., Gutierrez, B.T., and Weber, K.M., 2019, Barrier island geomorphology and shorebird habitat metrics—Sixteen sites on the U.S. Atlantic Coast, 2013–2014: U.S. Geological Survey data release,
https://doi.org/10.5066/P9V7F6UX.
Online_Linkage: https://doi.org/10.5066/P9V7F6UX
Online_Linkage:
Type_of_Source_Media: online
Source_Time_Period_of_Content:
Time_Period_Information:
Single_Date/Time:
Calendar_Date: 2014
Source_Currentness_Reference: ground condition
Source_Citation_Abbreviation: morphology_raw
Source_Contribution:
Lidar-derived Beach Morphology (Dune Crest, Dune Toe, and Shoreline) for U.S. Sandy Coastlines used to extract distance from morphology to sampling locations
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
This and subsequent process steps were performed in ArcGIS Pro’s Python window. The original code was written by Emily J. Sturdivant, and the code was translated into process steps by Julia L. Heslin.
Process_Date: 2021
Process_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Person_Primary:
Contact_Person: Julia L. Heslin
Contact_Organization: U.S. Geological Survey
Contact_Position: Geographer
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: mailing and physical
Address: 384 Woods Hole Road
City: Woods Hole
State_or_Province: MA
Postal_Code: 02540
Contact_Voice_Telephone: 508-457-2262
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: jheslin@usgs.gov
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
1) DEM Processing: A few steps were required to process the DEM from raw data (DEM_raw). It is important to note that all source data were projected to UTM zone 18N NAD83 prior to processing. The DEM tile(s) were copied from their native GeoTIFF format to a file geodatabase (Data Management Tools >> Raster >> Raster Dataset >> Copy Raster. The study area may be comprised of multiple DEM tiles which were mosaicked into a single mosaic dataset (Data Management Tools >> Raster >> Raster Dataset >> Mosaic) (DEM_preprocessed) . Any NoData values that were present in the DEM were set to null (Spatial Analyst Tools >> Conditional >> Set Null). Unless otherwise noted, the following steps were performed by one person, Julia L. Heslin.
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: DEM_raw
Process_Date: 20210601
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: DEM_preprocessed
Process_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Person_Primary:
Contact_Person: Julia L. Heslin
Contact_Organization: U.S. Geological Survey
Contact_Position: Geographer
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: mailing and physical
Address: 384 Woods Hole Road
City: Woods Hole
State_or_Province: MA
Postal_Code: 02540
Contact_Voice_Telephone: 508-457-2262
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: jheslin@usgs.gov
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
2) Morphology processing: A dataset with morphological characteristics, was available for the extraction of multiple variables, specifically dune toe, dune crest, and shoreline point location information for Assateague Island. For 2014, these points were already converted and available from this data release (
https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/5daa377fe4b09fd3b0c9ce84).
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: morphology_raw
Process_Date: 20210601
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: DL_pts
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: DH_pts
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: SL_pts
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
3) Barrier island boundary processing:
A polygon delineating the barrier island boundary was created using the DEM (DEM_preprocessed) and morphology source data (SL_pts) (see process steps 1 and 2).
Several tools were needed to convert the previously created boundary data to the barrier island boundary used in this project. Using the Con tool (Geoprocessing Tools >> Spatial Analyst >> Conditional >> Con), the DEM was reclassified where anything above the local MHW value was assigned as 1. The raster was converted to a polygon feature class (Geoprocessing Tools >> Conversion >> From Raster >> Raster to Polygon) and aggregated (Geoprocessing Tools >> Cartography >> Generalization >> Aggregate Polygons) to merge any features at least 300 square meters in size within a 10 meter distance of each other. These same steps were performed to create polygon features at the mean tide level (MTL), which is MHW (0.34) plus the local mean low water (MLW) (-0.13) divided by two. The purpose of this is to capture the extent of the bay side shoreline of the island.
The MHW and MTL polygons were then combined into one bayside polygon. Before this, inlet lines were manually drawn to capture the edges of the barrier island using the basemap imagery from Esri. These inlet lines were saved as a feature class (inlet_lines). Then, the Symmetrical Difference tool (Geoprocessing Tools >> Analysis >> Overlay >> Symmetrical Difference) was used to find where the MHW and MTL polygons intersected and keep features where they do not overlap (symdiff). Using the Feature to Polygon tool (Geoprocessing Tools >> Data Management >> Features >> Feature to Polygon), any extraneous shoreline polygon features were split using the symdiff and inlet_lines feature classes (split). This split feature class was then spatially joined with the SL_pts features (extracted from process step 2). Any of the split polygon features that completely contained shoreline points were kept (split_join). Then, any features from the symdiff and split_join feature classes that overlapped were removed using the Erase tool (Geoprocessing Tools >> Analysis >> Overlay >> Erase).
The bayside polygon was combined with the MHW polygon using the Union tool (Geoprocessing Tools >> Analysis >> Overlay >> Union). All features from this output were dissolved to make a single part polygon (Geoprocessing Tools >> Data Management >> Generalization >> Dissolve). Any extraneous features that did not reflect the barrier island boundary (barrier_boundary) were manually deleted.
The last step in creating the barrier island boundary polygon was to snap the polygon to the shoreline points within a 25 meter distance where they don’t already match. The Densify tool (Geoprocessing Tools >> Editing >> Densify) was used to add new vertices to the barrier island boundary at 25 meter increments. These vertices were then snapped to the shoreline points as long as they were within 25 meters of each other. After this step, any holes that existed in the barrier island boundary polygon were deleted using the Eliminate Polygon Part tool (Geoprocessing Tools >> Data Management >> Generalization >> Eliminate Polygon Part). Any part less than 99% of the total polygon area that was contained in the barrier island boundary was deleted. This is to ensure that all holes in the polygon were eliminated. Finally, the Dissolve tool was used to aggregate the individual polygons into a single multi-part feature.
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: DEM_preprocessed
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: SL_pts
Process_Date: 20210601
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: barrier_boundary
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: inlet_lines
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
4) DEM raster extraction:
Using the barrier island boundary as the extent (see step 3), the DEM was then resampled to a five meter pixel size using a bilinear resampling technique (Data Management Tools >> Raster >> Raster Processing >> Resample). It was then adjusted to the local mean high water (MHW) for the study area (0.34m) by subtracting 0.34 from the DEM (3D Analyst Tools >> Raster Math >> Minus)(local_MHW_DEM).
Additional rasters were calculated using the DEM, including aspect (3D Analyst Tools >> Raster Surface >> Aspect) and slope (with the output measurement set as percent rise) (3D Analyst Tools >> Raster Surface >> Slope).
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: DEM_preprocessed
Process_Date: 20210601
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: slope
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: aspect
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: local_MHW_DEM
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
5) Morphology raster extraction:
Using the barrier island boundary as the extent (see step 3), distance rasters using the Euclidean Distance tool (Geoprocessing Tools >> Spatial Analyst >> Distance >> Euclidean Distance) were created using the preprocessed morphology points.
Two rasters were created related to the shoreline morphology: distance to the full island shoreline; and distance to the oceanside shoreline. In order to retrieve the distance to the full island shoreline, the barrier_boundary was converted to a line using the Polygon to Line tool (Geoprocessing Tools >> Data Management >> Features >> Polygon to Line). This line feature was used to calculate the distance to the full boundary shoreline. To calculate the distance to the oceanside shoreline, first the barrier_boundary and inlet_lines were converted using the Feature to Line tool (Geoprocessing Tools >> Data Management >> Features >> Feature to Line) indicating where the inlets split the shoreline. Then, the SL_pts file was spatially joined to the split shoreline feature class. Any line features that completely contained the SL_pts were kept. The shoreline was then aggregated to one oceanside shoreline feature using the Dissolve tool (Geoprocessing Tools >> Data Management >> Generalization >> Dissolve) and used to generate the oceanside shoreline distance raster (distance_to_oceanside_shoreline).
Additional distance rasters using the dune toe, dune crest, and inlet features were created. The DL_pts and DH_pts were used to derive the distance_to_DL and distance_to_DH rasters (with 200 meters being the maximum threshold value). The inlet at Ocean City (which was manually selected and saved as a separate feature class) was used to create the distance_to_OceanCity_inlet raster.
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: DL_pts
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: DH_pts
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: SL_line
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: barrier_boundary
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: inlet_lines
Process_Date: 20210601
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: distance_to_full_shoreline
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: distance_to_oceanside_shoreline
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: distance_to_DH
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: distance_to_DL
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: distance_to_OceanCity_inlet
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
6) Field data processing:
Field data documenting locations of seabeach amaranth plants (field_data_raw) were used in the creation of this dataset. The field dataset has records of seabeach amaranth locations, grazed status, and other attributes from 2001-2018.
The seabeach amaranth field data, originally formatted as an Excel spreadsheet, were imported as a Python Pandas data frame (amaranth_data_frame). Since the field data contains data from multiple years, rows from the year in question were selected.
The data frame was converted to a feature class by first keeping all columns from the data frame and converting them to a NumPypy array. The NumPyArrayToFeatureClass function (Python >> Data Access Module >> Functions >> NumPyArrayToFeatureClass) was used to convert the array to a feature class.
A training dataset with random points and plant observations (training_pts) was created first by generating random points using the Create Random Points tool (Geoprocessing Tools >> Data Management >> Sampling >> Create Random Points). The random points distributed within the barrier island boundary polygon (created in step 3) no less than 5 meters apart. The random points were merged with the plant observations into one feature class. A flag field called plant_presence was created to distinguish plants from random points (a value of 1 indicates plant presence and 0 indicates a random point).
A feature class of plants from the previous year (lastyr_pts) was created by selecting the rows in the field data data frame from the previous year, which for this dataset was 2011 The selected rows in the data frame were converted to a NumPy array then to feature class using the NumPyArrayToFeatureClass function (Python >> Data Access Module >> Functions >> NumPyArrayToFeatureClass). A tally field (called cnt) was added to the lastyear_pts feature class.
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: field_data_raw
Process_Date: 20210601
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: amaranth_data_frame
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: training_pts
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: lastyr_pts
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
7)Field data raster extraction:
A raster dataset indicating the number of last year’s (2013) points within a 30 meter radius of a grid cell was created. The NbrCircle tool was used to specify this radius value (Python >> Spatial Analyst module >> Classes >> Neighborhood classes >> NbrCircle). The Point Statistics tool (Geoprocessing Tools >> Spatial Analyst >> Neighborhood >> Point Statistics) was used to create a raster of the number of last year’s points in the 30 meter radius.
Distance and direction rasters to the nearest plant from the previous year were also created. The Euclidean Distance tool was used to calculate: a distance raster with 200 meters being the maximum threshold distance the raster values cannot exceed (distance_to_plant); and a direction raster (direction_to_plant). Another direction raster relative to the adjacent mean high water shoreline was generated as well (direction_to_shore).
The difference between direction_to_plant and direction_to_shore was calculated with the Minus tool (3D Analyst Tools >> Raster Math >> Minus) (direction_to_plant_alongshore). The values from this raster indicate updrift (0 to 180) and downdrift (less than 0 or greater than 180). The dir2plant_alongshore raster was reclassified into these two categories (1 for updrift and –1 for downdrift) (Geoprocessing Tools >> Spatial Analyst >> Reclass >> Reclassify). The reclassified raster was multiplied by the distance_to_plant raster to get the final distance raster (distance_to_plant_final), where positive values indicate updrift and negative indicate downdrift.
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: training_pts
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: lastyr_pts
Process_Date: 20210601
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: direction_to_plant
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: distance_to_plant_final
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
8)Vegetation processing:
The original vegetation data (vegetation_raw) were in a shapefile format and were first imported into a file geodatabase for processing. The vegetation feature class was then converted to a raster (Conversion Tools >> To Raster >> Polygon to Raster) (vegetation_raster).
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: vegetation_raw
Process_Date: 20210601
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: vegetation_raster
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
9)Raster to spreadsheet:
From the raster datasets created from the process steps above(vegetaion, elevation, and distance rasters), the pixel values were extracted to the corresponding training points feature class (training_pts) (Spatial Analyst Tools >> Extraction >> Extract Multi Values to Points). Extracted values can be found in the field attributes of the final csv.
The training points feature class (training_pts) was then converted to a data frame by first converting the points to a NumPy array (Python >> Data Access Module >> Functions >> FeatureClassToNumPyArray), then to a Python dictionary, then a data frame using the Pandas library.
The plants data frame (amaranth_data_frame) described in process step 6 was then joined with this data frame described in the previous paragraph (data frame from training_pts). Fields for lat and lon were added as attributes to this data frame and calculated using the PyProj library (
https://pyproj4.github.io/pyproj/v2.2.0rel/api/transformer.html#pyproj-transform). The data frame was then written to an Excel spreadsheet using the Python Pandas library (
https://pandas.pydata.org/docs/reference/api/pandas.DataFrame.to_excel.html).
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: slope
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: aspect
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: local_MHW_DEM
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: distance_to_full_shoreline
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: distance_to_oceanside_shoreline
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: distance_to_DH
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: distance_to_DL
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: direction_to_plant
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: distance_to_plant_final
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: vegetation_raster
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: amaranth_data_frame
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: training_pts
Process_Date: 20210601
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: Presence_Absence_pts2014.csv
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
10) Conversion of csv to shapefile. The .csv file was converted to a shapefile by right clicking the dataset in ArcMap, and selecting "Display XY Data" where x_utm and y_utm were chosen for the x and y fields respectively, and the coordinate system NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_18N was selected for the dataset.
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: Presence_Absence_pts2014.csv
Process_Date: 20211205
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: Presence_Absence_pts2014.shp
Process_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Person_Primary:
Contact_Person: Rachel E. Henderson
Contact_Organization: U.S. Geological Survey
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: mailing and physical address
Address: 384 Woods Hole Road
City: Woods Hole
State_or_Province: MA
Postal_Code: 02543-1598
Country: USA
Contact_Voice_Telephone: 508-548-8700
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: rehenderson@contractor.usgs.gov
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
11) Coordinate system updated from projected coordinates in "NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_18N" to geographic "GCS_North_American_1983" for publication using ArcToolbox > Data Management Tools > Projections and Transformations > Project.
Process_Date: 20220105
Process_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Person_Primary:
Contact_Person: Rachel E. Henderson
Contact_Organization: U.S. Geological Survey
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: mailing and physical address
Address: 384 Woods Hole Road
City: Woods Hole
State_or_Province: MA
Postal_Code: 02543-1598
Country: USA
Contact_Voice_Telephone: 508-548-8700
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: rehenderson@contractor.usgs.gov