{PAGE NAME} | {WEB AREA NAME}

EM Identity and Description

EM Identification (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)

EM ID em.detail.idHelp ?	New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
EM Short Name em.detail.shortNameHelp ?	EnviroAtlas - Natural biological nitrogen fixation	RUM: Valuing fishing quality, Michigan, USA	Wild bees over 26 yrs of restored prairie, IL, USA	IPaC, USFWS, USA	CommunityViz, Albany county, Wyoming
EM Full Name em.detail.fullNameHelp ?	US EPA EnviroAtlas - BNF (Natural biological nitrogen fixation), USA	Random utility model (RUM) Valuing Recreational fishing quality in streams and rivers, Michigan, USA	Wild bee community change over a 26 year chronosequence of restored tallgrass prairie, IL, USA	Information for Planning and Conservation tool, USFWS, U.S.	Wyoming Community Viz TM Partnership Phase I Pilot: Aquifer Protection and Community Viz TM in Albany County, Wyoming.
EM Source or Collection em.detail.emSourceOrCollectionHelp ?	US EPA \| EnviroAtlas	*	None	*	*
EM Source Document ID	262 ? Comment: EnviroAtlas maps BNF based on a correlation with AET modeled by Cleveland et al. 1999, and modified by land use (% natural vs. ag/developed) within each HUC. AET was modeled using climate and land use parameters (equation from Sanford and Selnick 2013). For full citations of these related models, see below, "Document ID for related EM.	382 ? Comment: Data collected from Michigan Recreational Angler Survey, a mail survey administered monthly to random sample of Michigan fishing license holders since July 2008. Data available taken from 2008-2010.	401	451 ? Comment: Assume peer reviewed at least internally by USFWS	479 ? Comment: Published as a report by the University of Wyoming, but no record of peer review.
Document Author em.detail.documentAuthorHelp ?	US EPA Office of Research and Development - National Exposure Research Laboratory	Melstrom, R. T., Lupi, F., Esselman, P.C., and R. J. Stevenson	Griffin, S. R, B. Bruninga-Socolar, M. A. Kerr, J. Gibbs and R. Winfree	U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service	Lieske, S. N., Mullen, S., Knapp, M., & Hamerlinck, J. D.
Document Year em.detail.documentYearHelp ?	2013	2014	2017	None	2003
Document Title em.detail.sourceIdHelp ?	EnviroAtlas - National	Valuing recreational fishing quality at rivers and streams	Wild bee community change over a 26-year chronosequence of restored tallgrass prairie	Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC	Wyoming Community Viz TM Partnership Phase I Pilot: Aquifer Protection and Community Viz TM in Albany County, Wyoming
Document Status em.detail.statusCategoryHelp ?	*	*	Peer reviewed and published	Other or unclear (explain in Comment)	Not peer reviewed but is published (explain in Comment)
Comments on Status em.detail.commentsOnStatusHelp ?	Published on US EPA EnviroAtlas website	*	Published journal manuscript	Published report	Published report

Software and Access (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)

EM ID em.detail.idHelp ?	New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
EM Software Access info Exit em.detail.modelAccessInformationHelp ?	https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas	*	Not applicable	https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/	https://communityviz.com/
Contact Name em.detail.contactNameHelp ?	EnviroAtlas Team ? Comment: Additional contact: Jana Compton, EPA	Richard Melstrom	Sean R. Griffin	USFWS	Scott Lieske
Contact Address	Not reported	Department of Agricultural Economics, Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, Oklahoma, USA	Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Natural Resources, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, U.S.A.	911 NE 11th Avenue Portland, OR 97232	Department of Agricultural & Applied Economics University of Wyoming, Laramie WY 82071
Contact Email	enviroatlas@epa.gov	melstrom@okstate.edu	srgriffin108@gmail.com	fwhq_ipac@fws.gov	lieske@uwyo.edu

EM Description (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)

EM ID em.detail.idHelp ?	New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
Summary Description em.detail.summaryDescriptionHelp ?	DATA FACT SHEET: "This EnviroAtlas national map displays the rate of biological nitrogen (N) fixation (BNF) in natural/semi-natural ecosystems within each watershed (12-digit HUC) in the conterminous United States (excluding Hawaii and Alaska) for the year 2006. These data are based on the modeled relationship of BNF with actual evapotranspiration (AET) in natural/semi-natural ecosystems. The mean rate of BNF is for the 12-digit HUC, not to natural/semi-natural lands within the HUC." "BNF in natural/semi-natural ecosystems was estimated using a correlation with actual evapotranspiration (AET). This correlation is based on a global meta-analysis of BNF in natural/semi-natural ecosystems. AET estimates for 2006 were calculated using a regression equation describing the correlation of AET with climate and land use/land cover variables in the conterminous US. Data describing annual average minimum and maximum daily temperatures and total precipitation at the 2.5 arcmin (~4 km) scale for 2006 were acquired from the PRISM climate dataset. The National Land Cover Database (NLCD) for 2006 was acquired from the USGS at the scale of 30 x 30 m. BNF in natural/semi-natural ecosystems within individual 12-digit HUCs was modeled with an equation describing the statistical relationship between BNF (kg N ha-1 yr-1) and actual evapotranspiration (AET; cm yr–1) and scaled to the proportion of non-developed and non-agricultural land in the 12-digit HUC." EnviroAtlas maps BNF based on a correlation with AET modeled by Cleveland et al. 1999, and modified by land use (% natural vs. ag/developed) within each HUC. AET was modeled using climate and land use parameters (equation from Sanford and Selnick 2013). For full citations of these related models, see below, "Document ID for related EM."	ABSTRACT: " This paper describes an economic model that links the demand for recreational stream fishing to fish biomass. Useful measures of fishing quality are often difficult to obtain. In the past, economists have linked the demand for fishing sites to species presence‐absence indicators or average self‐reported catch rates. The demand model presented here takes advantage of a unique data set of statewide biomass estimates for several popular game fish species in Michigan, including trout, bass and walleye. These data are combined with fishing trip information from a 2008–2010 survey of Michigan anglers in order to estimate a demand model. Fishing sites are defined by hydrologic unit boundaries and information on fish assemblages so that each site corresponds to the area of a small subwatershed, about 100–200 square miles in size. The random utility model choice set includes nearly all fishable streams in the state. The results indicate a significant relationship between the site choice behavior of anglers and the biomass of certain species. Anglers are more likely to visit streams in watersheds high in fish abundance, particularly for brook trout and walleye. The paper includes estimates of the economic value of several quality change and site loss scenarios. "	ABSTRACT: "Restoration efforts often focus on plants, but additionally require the establishment and long-term persistence of diverse groups of nontarget organisms, such as bees, for important ecosystem functions and meeting restoration goals. We investigated long-term patterns in the response of bees to habitat restoration by sampling bee communities along a 26-year chronosequence of restored tallgrass prairie in north-central Illinois, U.S.A. Specifically, we examined how bee communities changed over time since restoration in terms of (1) abundance and richness, (2) community composition, and (3) the two components of beta diversity, one-to-one species replacement, and changes in species richness. Bee abundance and raw richness increased with restoration age from the low level of the pre-restoration (agricultural) sites to the target level of the remnant prairie within the first 2–3 years after restoration, and these high levels were maintained throughout the entire restoration chronosequence. Bee community composition of the youngest restored sites differed from that of prairie remnants, but 5–7 years post-restoration the community composition of restored prairie converged with that of remnants. Landscape context, particularly nearby wooded land, was found to affect abundance, rarefied richness, and community composition. Partitioning overall beta diversity between sites into species replacement and richness effects revealed that the main driver of community change over time was the gradual accumulation of species, rather than one-to-one species replacement. At the spatial and temporal scales we studied, we conclude that prairie restoration efforts targeting plants also successfully restore bee communities."	IPaC is a project planning tool that streamlines the USFWS environmental review process. Explores species and habitat: See if any listed species, critical habitat, migratory birds or other natural resources may be impacted by your project. Using the map tool, explore other resources in your location, such as wetlands, wildlife refuges, GAP land cover, and other important biological resources. Conduct a regulatory review: Log in and define a project to get an official species list and evaluate potential impacts on resources managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Follow IPaC's Endangered Species Act (ESA) Review process—a streamlined, step-by-step consultation process available in select areas for certain project types, agencies, and species. Build a Consultation Package: Consultation Package Builder (CPB) replaces and improves on the original Impact Analysis by providing an interactive, step-by-step process to help you prepare a full consultation package leveraging U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service data and recommendations, including conservation measures designed to help you avoid or minimize effects to listed species.	The Wyoming Community VizTM Partnership was established in 2001 to promote the use of geographic information system-based planning support systems and related decision support technologies in community land-use planning and economic development activities in the State of Wyoming. Partnership members include several state agencies, local governments and several nongovernment organizations. Partnership coordination is provided by the Wyoming Rural Development Council. Research and technical support is coordinated by the Wyoming Geographic Information Science Center’s Spatial Decision Support System Research Program at the University of Wyoming. In June 2002, the Partnership initiated a three-phase plan to promote Community VizTM based planning support systems in Wyoming. Phase I of the Partnership plan was a “proof of concept” pilot project set in Albany County in southeastern Wyoming. The goal of the project was to demonstrate the application of Community VizTM to a Wyoming-specific issue (in this case, aquifer protection) and to determine potential challenges for broader adoption in terms of data requirements, computing infrastructure and technological expertise. The results of the Phase I pilot project are detailed in this report. Efforts are currently underway to secure funding for Phase II of the plan, which expands the use of Community VizTM into four additional Wyoming communities. Specific Phase II objectives are to expand the type and number of issues addressed by Community VizTM and increase the use of Community VizTM in the planning process. As a part of Phase II the Partnership will create a technical assistance network aimed at assisting communities with the technical challenges in applying the software to their planning issues. The third phase will expand the program to more communities in the state, maintain the technical assistance network, and monitor the impact of Community VizTM on the planning process.
Specific Policy or Decision Context Cited em.detail.policyDecisionContextHelp ?	*	*	None identified	Determination of Effects on ESA listed taxa.	None provided
Biophysical Context	No additional description provided	stream and river reaches of Michigan	The Nachusa Grasslands consists of over 1,900 ha of restored prairie plantings, prairie remnants, and other habitats such as wetlands and oak savanna. The area is generally mesic with an average annual precipitation of 975 mm, and most precipitation occurs during the growing season.	N/A	Groundwater recharge area, City of Laramie
EM Scenario Drivers em.detail.scenarioDriverHelp ?	*	targeted sport fish biomass	No scenarios presented	N/A	Continuation of trends

EM Relationship to Other EMs or Applications

EM ID em.detail.idHelp ?	New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
Method Only, Application of Method or Model Run em.detail.methodOrAppHelp ?	Method + Application	Method + Application (multiple runs exist)	Method + Application (multiple runs exist)	Method Only	Model Run Associated with a Specific EM Application
New or Pre-existing EM? em.detail.newOrExistHelp ?	New or revised model	New or revised model	New or revised model	New or revised model	Continuation of trends

Related EMs (for example, other versions or derivations of this EM) described in ESML

EM ID em.detail.idHelp ?	New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
Document ID for related EM em.detail.relatedEmDocumentIdHelp ?	Doc-346 \| Doc-347 ? Comment: EnviroAtlas maps BNF based on a correlation with AET modeled by Cleveland et al. 1999, and modified by land use (% natural vs. ag/developed) within each HUC. AET was modeled using climate and land use parameters (equation from Sanford and Selnick 2013). For full citations of these related models, see below, "Document ID for related EM.	None	None	None	Doc-473
EM ID for related EM em.detail.relatedEmEmIdHelp ?	None	None	None	None	None

EM Modeling Approach

EM Relationship to Time (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)

EM ID em.detail.idHelp ?	New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
EM Temporal Extent em.detail.tempExtentHelp ?	2006-2010	2008-2010	1988-2014	Not applicable	2050
EM Time Dependence em.detail.timeDependencyHelp ?	*	*	time-stationary	*	*
EM Time Reference (Future/Past) em.detail.futurePastHelp ?	*	*	Not applicable	*	*
EM Time Continuity em.detail.continueDiscreteHelp ?	*	*	Not applicable	*	*
EM Temporal Grain Size Value em.detail.tempGrainSizeHelp ?	*	*	Not applicable	*	*
EM Temporal Grain Size Unit em.detail.tempGrainSizeUnitHelp ?	*	*	Not applicable	*	*

EM spatial extent (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)

EM ID em.detail.idHelp ?	New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
Bounding Type em.detail.boundingTypeHelp ?	Geopolitical	Watershed/Catchment/HUC	Physiographic or ecological	Not applicable	Watershed/Catchment/HUC
Spatial Extent Name em.detail.extentNameHelp ?	counterminous United States	HUCS in Michigan	Nachusa Grasslands	Not applicable	Laramie City's aquifer protection area
Spatial Extent Area (Magnitude) em.detail.extentAreaHelp ?	>1,000,000 km^2	100,000-1,000,000 km^2	10-100 km^2	Not applicable	*

Spatial Distribution of Computations (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)

EM ID em.detail.idHelp ?	New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
EM Spatial Distribution em.detail.distributeLumpHelp ?	* ? Comment: Watersheds (12-digit HUCs).	*	spatially distributed (in at least some cases)	spatially lumped (in all cases)	spatially lumped (in all cases)
Spatial Grain Type em.detail.spGrainTypeHelp ?	*	*	other (specify), for irregular (e.g., stream reach, lake basin)	Not applicable	Not applicable
Spatial Grain Size em.detail.spGrainSizeHelp ?	irregular	reach in HUC	Area varies by site	Not applicable	Not applicable

EM Structure and Computation Approach (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)

EM ID em.detail.idHelp ?	New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
EM Computational Approach em.detail.emComputationalApproachHelp ?	*	Numeric	Analytic	Other or unclear (comment)	Numeric
EM Determinism em.detail.deterStochHelp ?	*	*	deterministic	Not applicable	*
Statistical Estimation of EM em.detail.statisticalEstimationHelp ?	*	*	Conventional (frequentist) statistics	None	*

Model Checking Procedures Used (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)

EM ID em.detail.idHelp ?	New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
Model Calibration Reported? em.detail.calibrationHelp ?	*	*	No	Not applicable	Unclear
Model Goodness of Fit Reported? em.detail.goodnessFitHelp ?	*	Yes	No	Not applicable	*
Goodness of Fit (metric\| value \| unit) em.detail.goodnessFitValuesHelp ?	*	R squared \| 0.552 \| unitless	None	*	*
Model Operational Validation Reported? em.detail.validationHelp ?	*	*	No	Not applicable	Unclear
Model Uncertainty Analysis Reported? em.detail.uncertaintyAnalysisHelp ?	*	*	No	Not applicable	Unclear
Model Sensitivity Analysis Reported? em.detail.sensAnalysisHelp ?	*	*	No	Not applicable	Unclear
Model Sensitivity Analysis Include Interactions? em.detail.interactionConsiderHelp ?	*	*	Not applicable	*	*

EM Locations, Environments, Ecology

Location of EM Application (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)

Terrestrial location (Classification hierarchy: Continent > Country > U.S. State [United States only])

New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
North America United States	North America United States Michigan	North America United States Illinois	*	North America United States Wyoming

Marine location (Classification hierarchy: Realm > Region > Province > Ecoregion)

New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
*	*	None	*	*

Centroid Lat/Long (Decimal Degree)

EM ID em.detail.idHelp ?	New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
Centroid Latitude em.detail.ddLatHelp ?	39.5	45.12	41.89	Not applicable	41.31
Centroid Longitude em.detail.ddLongHelp ?	-98.35	85.18	-89.34	Not applicable	-105.46
Centroid Datum em.detail.datumHelp ?	*	*	WGS84	Not applicable	*
Centroid Coordinates Status em.detail.coordinateStatusHelp ?	Estimated	Estimated	Provided	Not applicable	Estimated

Environments and Scales Modeled (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)

EM ID em.detail.idHelp ?	New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
EM Environmental Sub-Class em.detail.emEnvironmentalSubclassHelp ?	Terrestrial Environment (sub-classes not fully specified)	Rivers and Streams	Agroecosystems \| Grasslands	Aquatic Environment (sub-classes not fully specified) \| Rivers and Streams \| Inland Wetlands \| Lakes and Ponds \| Near Coastal Marine and Estuarine \| Open Ocean and Seas \| Ground Water \| Terrestrial Environment (sub-classes not fully specified) \| Forests \| Agroecosystems \| Created Greenspace \| Grasslands \| Scrubland/Shrubland \| Barren \| Tundra \| Ice and Snow \| Atmosphere	Ground Water \| Terrestrial Environment (sub-classes not fully specified)
Specific Environment Type em.detail.specificEnvTypeHelp ?	Terrestrial	stream reaches	Restored prairie, prairie remnants, and cropland	None	watershed
EM Ecological Scale em.detail.ecoScaleHelp ?	Ecological scale is finer than that of the Environmental Sub-class	Ecological scale is finer than that of the Environmental Sub-class	Ecological scale corresponds to the Environmental Sub-class	Not applicable	*

Organisms modeled (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)

Scale of differentiation of organisms modeled

EM ID em.detail.idHelp ?	New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
EM Organismal Scale em.detail.orgScaleHelp ?	Not applicable	Not applicable	Species	Other (Comment) ? Comment: ESA designations include species and Ecological Significan Units of species	Not applicable

Taxonomic level and name of organisms or groups identified

New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
*	Family panfishes Species Brown trout smallmouth bass Brook trout Walleye	other Bees	*	*

EnviroAtlas URL

New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
Average Annual Precipitation, Natural Biological Nitrogen Fixation, The Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD)	The National Hydrography Dataset (NHD), The Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD), Enabling Conditions, Employment Rate	GAP Ecological Systems	GAP Ecological Systems, Percent GAP Status 1 & 2	Dasymetric Allocation of Population, Total Annual Reduced Nitrogen Deposition, Employment Rate

EM Ecosystem Goods and Services (EGS) potentially modeled, by classification system

* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left

CICES v 4.3 - Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (Section > Division > Group > Class)

New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
[Ecosystem] Regulation & Maintenance Maintenance of physical, chemical, biological conditions Soil formation and composition Decomposition and fixing processes	[Ecosystem] Provisioning Nutrition Biomass Wild animals and their outputs	[Ecosystem] Regulation & Maintenance Maintenance of physical, chemical, biological conditions Lifecycle maintenance, habitat and gene pool protection Maintaining nursery populations and habitats Pollination and seed dispersal	[Ecosystem] Regulation & Maintenance Maintenance of physical, chemical, biological conditions Lifecycle maintenance, habitat and gene pool protection Maintaining nursery populations and habitats	[Non-ecosystem] Regulation & Maintenance by natural physical structures and processes Mediation of waste, toxics and other nuisances By natural chemical and physical processes Not applicable [Ecosystem] Provisioning Materials Water Ground water for non-drinking purposes [Ecosystem] Cultural Physical and intellectual interactions with biota, ecosystems, and land-/seascapes [environmental settings] Physical and experiential interactions Physical use of land-/seascapes in different environmental settings Intellectual and representative interactions Aesthetic

National Ecosystem Services Classification System (NESCS) Plus

(Environmental Subclass > Ecological End-Product (EEP) > EEP Subclass > EEP Modifier)

New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
Atmosphere Soil (2) Specific types of soil Quality Indicator	Rivers and Streams (111) Fauna (4) Fish Quality Indicator	None	Rivers and Streams (111) Fauna (4) Fish Stock Indicator	Groundwater Water (3) Liquid water Flow Indicator

EM Variable Names (and Units)

* Note that for runs, variable name is displayed only where data for that variable differed by run AND those differences were reported in the source document. Where differences occurred but were not reported, the variable is not listed. Click on variable name to view details.

To view run information for variables, select any variable below or view run data for all variables.

Predictor

EM ID em.detail.idHelp ?	New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
Driving Variables (and Units) em.detail.drivingVariableHelp ?	12-digit hydrological unit code (HUC12) (Not applicable) Annual average of maximum daily temperature (°C) Annual average of minimum daily temperature (°C) Annual precipitation (cm/yr) Land use/land cover (Not applicable)	Agriculture (%) All species angling license (y/n) (Not applicable) Angler home zipcode (Not applicable) Avg. light vehicle fuel economy ($/gal) Fishing trip type (individual angler) (Not applicable) Forest (%) Gasoline price (monthly retail) ($/gal) Land use land cover class (site reach) (Not applicable) Maintenance and depreciation (vehicle) ($/mi) Mean angler income ($/yr) Mean temperature (July) (°C) NHD Hydrologic units (Not applicable) National wild and scenic rivers protection (%) Restricted angling license (y/n) (Not applicable) Round trip travel distance (mi) Stream length (km) Targeted sport fish (Not applicable) Targeted sport fish mean biomass (brook trout) (kg/ha) Targeted sport fish mean biomass (brown trout) (kg/ha) Targeted sport fish mean biomass (panfishes) (kg/ha) Targeted sport fish mean biomass (smallmouth bass) (kg/ha) Targeted sport fish mean biomass (walleye) (kg/ha) Urban (%)	Agriculture within 500 m (%) Size of site (ha) Woodland within 500 m (%)	Area of interest (AOI) species specific questions (Not applicable) Geographic range maps of all species of concern (listed or otherwise) (m^2) Marine mammals (Not applicable) Migratory birds of conservation concern (Not applicable) Programatic determination keys (Not applicable) Project location (point or polygon) (Not applicable) Qualification questions for federal involvement (Y/N) (Not applicable) USFWS managed refuges and fish hatcheries (Not applicable) Wetlands & aquatic areas of concern (Not applicable)	Albany county study area boundary (Not reported) City annual budget data ($) Common land use list (Not reported) Distances from residential parcels to recreational trail access (miles) Existing development (Not reported) Existing land use or zoning data (Not reported) Guidelines for future land use/zoning (Not reported) Number of vehicle trips taken (trips) Population projections (Not reported) Property, sales, and lodging tax data ($) Proportion of land development to open space seen from observation points (NA) Roads/infrastructure (Not reported) Species distribution GIS data (Not reported) Topography (Not reported) Vehicle miles traveled (miles) Water consumption data (millions of gallons) Water quality data (nitrate levels) (ppm)
Constant or Factor Variables (and Units) em.detail.constantFactorVariableHelp ?	Land cover parameter (unitless)	Brook trout coefficient (unitless) Brown trout coefficient (unitless) Cold water (No. trips) Did not target particular species (y/n) (Not applicable) Opportunity cost constant (unitless) Panfishes coefficient (unitless) Smallmouth bass coefficient (unitless) Targed panfishes (y/n) (Not applicable) Targeted bass (yes/no) (Not applicable) Targeted other fishes (y/n) (Not applicable) Targeted trout (y/n) (Not applicable) Targeted walleye (y/n) (Not applicable) Walleye coefficient (unitless)	Age of site restoration (years) Management (Not applicable)	None	*

Intermediate

EM ID em.detail.idHelp ?	New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
Intermediate (Computed) Variables (and Units) em.detail.intermediateVariableHelp ?	Actual evapotranspiration per HUC12 (cm year^-1) Biological nitrogen fixation per HUC12 (kg N ha^-1 yr^-1) Land cover fraction per HUC12 (%)	Driving costs ($) Expected targeted sport fish presence by reach (cold or warm water) (Not applicable) Opportunity cost of travel time ($) Stream reaches (fishable) within 200 miles of angler zipcode (Not applicable) Travel costs ($)	None	Critical habitat (proposed and designated for species of concern) (Not applicable) Official species list (candidate, proposed and T&E species) potentially within area of interest (AOI) (Not applicable)	*

Response

EM ID em.detail.idHelp ?	New or revised model	EM-660	EM-788	New or revised model	Continuation of trends
Observed Response Variables (and Units) em.detail.observedResponseHelp ?	None	None	Bee abundance (No.) Bee species richness (No.)	None	*
Computed Response Variables (and Units) em.detail.computedResponseHelp ?	Natural BNF per HUC12 (kg N ha^-1 yr^-1)	Angler recreational demand increase for brook trout (WTP) ($) Angler recreational demand increase for brown trout (WTP) ($) Angler recreational demand increase for panfishes (WTP) ($) Angler recreational demand increase for smallmouth bass (WTP) ($) Angler recreational demand increase for walleye (WTP) ($)	Bee species rarified richness (No.) Richness effects (of changes in bee community composition over time) (unitless) Species replacement (of changes in bee community composition over time) (unitless) Total Jaccard dissimilarity (of changes in bee community composition over time) (unitless)	Determination of effect (Not applicable) Project qualification of a pre-exsting programmatic Sec. 7 consultaton or internal FWS analysis (Not applicable)	Cost of community services (millions of dollars) Local tax revenues (millions of dollars) Quantity of water (millions of gallons) Recreation access (Miles to trail) Riparian area impacted (Acres) Traffic impacts (Vehicle miles traveled) Visual impact (Not reported) Water quality (nitrate levels) (ppm) Wildlife habitat (acres)

US EPA

EcoService Models Library (ESML)

View Runs

: Wild bee community change over a 26 year chronosequence of restored tallgrass prairie, IL, USA (EM-788)

EM Identity and Description

Comment:

Comment:

Comment:

Comment:

Comment:

Related EMs (for example, other versions or derivations of this EM) described in ESML

Comment:

EM Modeling Approach

Comment:

EM Locations, Environments, Ecology

Terrestrial location (Classification hierarchy: Continent > Country > U.S. State [United States only])

Marine location (Classification hierarchy: Realm > Region > Province > Ecoregion)

Centroid Lat/Long (Decimal Degree)

Scale of differentiation of organisms modeled

Comment:

Taxonomic level and name of organisms or groups identified

EnviroAtlas URL

EM Ecosystem Goods and Services (EGS) potentially modeled, by classification system

* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left

CICES v 4.3 - Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (Section > Division > Group > Class)

National Ecosystem Services Classification System (NESCS) Plus

(Environmental Subclass > Ecological End-Product (EEP) > EEP Subclass > EEP Modifier)

EM Variable Names (and Units)

* Note that for runs, variable name is displayed only where data for that variable differed by run AND those differences were reported in the source document. Where differences occurred but were not reported, the variable is not listed. Click on variable name to view details.

Predictor

Intermediate

Response