The United States has an average elevation of roughly 2,500 feet (763m) above sea level, however there is a stark contrast in elevations across the country. Highest states Colorado is the highest state in the United States, with an average elevation of 6,800 feet (2,074m) above sea level. The 10 states with the highest average elevation are all in the western region of the country, as this is, by far, the most mountainous region in the country. The largest mountain ranges in the contiguous western states are the Rocky Mountains, Sierra Nevada, and Cascade Range, while the Appalachian Mountains is the longest range in the east - however, the highest point in the U.S. is Denali (Mount McKinley), found in Alaska. Lowest states At just 60 feet above sea level, Delaware is the state with the lowest elevation. Delaware is the second smallest state, behind Rhode Island, and is located on the east coast. Larger states with relatively low elevations are found in the southern region of the country - both Florida and Louisiana have an average elevation of just 100 feet (31m) above sea level, and large sections of these states are extremely vulnerable to flooding and rising sea levels, as well as intermittent tropical storms.

At 282 feet below sea level, Death Valley in the Mojave Desert, California is the lowest point of elevation in the United States (and North America). Coincidentally, Death Valley is less than 85 miles from Mount Whitney, the highest point of elevation in the mainland United States. Death Valley is one of the hottest places on earth, and in 1913 it was the location of the highest naturally occurring temperature ever recorded on Earth (although some meteorologists doubt its legitimacy). New Orleans Louisiana is the only other state where the lowest point of elevation was below sea level. This is in the city of New Orleans, on the Mississippi River Delta. Over half of the city (up to two-thirds) is located below sea level, and recent studies suggest that the city is sinking further - man-made efforts to prevent water damage or flooding are cited as one reason for the city's continued subsidence, as they prevent new sediment from naturally reinforcing the ground upon which the city is built. These factors were one reason why New Orleans was so severely impacted by Hurricane Katrina in 2005 - the hurricane itself was one of the deadliest in history, and it destroyed many of the levee systems in place to prevent flooding, and the elevation exacerbated the damage caused. Highest low points The lowest point in five states is over 1,000 feet above sea level. Colorado's lowest point, at 3,315 feet, is still higher than the highest point in 22 states or territories. For all states whose lowest points are found above sea level, these points are located in rivers, streams, or bodies of water.

IntroductionClimate Central’s Surging Seas: Risk Zone map shows areas vulnerable to near-term flooding from different combinations of sea level rise, storm surge, tides, and tsunamis, or to permanent submersion by long-term sea level rise. Within the U.S., it incorporates the latest, high-resolution, high-accuracy lidar elevation data supplied by NOAA (exceptions: see Sources), displays points of interest, and contains layers displaying social vulnerability, population density, and property value. Outside the U.S., it utilizes satellite-based elevation data from NASA in some locations, and Climate Central’s more accurate CoastalDEM in others (see Methods and Qualifiers). It provides the ability to search by location name or postal code.The accompanying Risk Finder is an interactive data toolkit available for some countries that provides local projections and assessments of exposure to sea level rise and coastal flooding tabulated for many sub-national districts, down to cities and postal codes in the U.S. Exposure assessments always include land and population, and in the U.S. extend to over 100 demographic, economic, infrastructure and environmental variables using data drawn mainly from federal sources, including NOAA, USGS, FEMA, DOT, DOE, DOI, EPA, FCC and the Census.This web tool was highlighted at the launch of The White House's Climate Data Initiative in March 2014. Climate Central's original Surging Seas was featured on NBC, CBS, and PBS U.S. national news, the cover of The New York Times, in hundreds of other stories, and in testimony for the U.S. Senate. The Atlantic Cities named it the most important map of 2012. Both the Risk Zone map and the Risk Finder are grounded in peer-reviewed science.Back to topMethods and QualifiersThis map is based on analysis of digital elevation models mosaicked together for near-total coverage of the global coast. Details and sources for U.S. and international data are below. Elevations are transformed so they are expressed relative to local high tide lines (Mean Higher High Water, or MHHW). A simple elevation threshold-based “bathtub method” is then applied to determine areas below different water levels, relative to MHHW. Within the U.S., areas below the selected water level but apparently not connected to the ocean at that level are shown in a stippled green (as opposed to solid blue) on the map. Outside the U.S., due to data quality issues and data limitations, all areas below the selected level are shown as solid blue, unless separated from the ocean by a ridge at least 20 meters (66 feet) above MHHW, in which case they are shown as not affected (no blue).Areas using lidar-based elevation data: U.S. coastal states except AlaskaElevation data used for parts of this map within the U.S. come almost entirely from ~5-meter horizontal resolution digital elevation models curated and distributed by NOAA in its Coastal Lidar collection, derived from high-accuracy laser-rangefinding measurements. The same data are used in NOAA’s Sea Level Rise Viewer. (High-resolution elevation data for Louisiana, southeast Virginia, and limited other areas comes from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)). Areas using CoastalDEM™ elevation data: Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Corn Island (Nicaragua), Dominica, Dominican Republic, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Blas (Panama), Suriname, The Bahamas, Trinidad and Tobago. CoastalDEM™ is a proprietary high-accuracy bare earth elevation dataset developed especially for low-lying coastal areas by Climate Central. Use our contact form to request more information.Warning for areas using other elevation data (all other areas)Areas of this map not listed above use elevation data on a roughly 90-meter horizontal resolution grid derived from NASA’s Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM). SRTM provides surface elevations, not bare earth elevations, causing it to commonly overestimate elevations, especially in areas with dense and tall buildings or vegetation. Therefore, the map under-portrays areas that could be submerged at each water level, and exposure is greater than shown (Kulp and Strauss, 2016). However, SRTM includes error in both directions, so some areas showing exposure may not be at risk.SRTM data do not cover latitudes farther north than 60 degrees or farther south than 56 degrees, meaning that sparsely populated parts of Arctic Circle nations are not mapped here, and may show visual artifacts.Areas of this map in Alaska use elevation data on a roughly 60-meter horizontal resolution grid supplied by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This data is referenced to a vertical reference frame from 1929, based on historic sea levels, and with no established conversion to modern reference frames. The data also do not take into account subsequent land uplift and subsidence, widespread in the state. As a consequence, low confidence should be placed in Alaska map portions.Flood control structures (U.S.)Levees, walls, dams or other features may protect some areas, especially at lower elevations. Levees and other flood control structures are included in this map within but not outside of the U.S., due to poor and missing data. Within the U.S., data limitations, such as an incomplete inventory of levees, and a lack of levee height data, still make assessing protection difficult. For this map, levees are assumed high and strong enough for flood protection. However, it is important to note that only 8% of monitored levees in the U.S. are rated in “Acceptable” condition (ASCE). Also note that the map implicitly includes unmapped levees and their heights, if broad enough to be effectively captured directly by the elevation data.For more information on how Surging Seas incorporates levees and elevation data in Louisiana, view our Louisiana levees and DEMs methods PDF. For more information on how Surging Seas incorporates dams in Massachusetts, view the Surging Seas column of the web tools comparison matrix for Massachusetts.ErrorErrors or omissions in elevation or levee data may lead to areas being misclassified. Furthermore, this analysis does not account for future erosion, marsh migration, or construction. As is general best practice, local detail should be verified with a site visit. Sites located in zones below a given water level may or may not be subject to flooding at that level, and sites shown as isolated may or may not be be so. Areas may be connected to water via porous bedrock geology, and also may also be connected via channels, holes, or passages for drainage that the elevation data fails to or cannot pick up. In addition, sea level rise may cause problems even in isolated low zones during rainstorms by inhibiting drainage.ConnectivityAt any water height, there will be isolated, low-lying areas whose elevation falls below the water level, but are protected from coastal flooding by either man-made flood control structures (such as levees), or the natural topography of the surrounding land. In areas using lidar-based elevation data or CoastalDEM (see above), elevation data is accurate enough that non-connected areas can be clearly identified and treated separately in analysis (these areas are colored green on the map). In the U.S., levee data are complete enough to factor levees into determining connectivity as well.However, in other areas, elevation data is much less accurate, and noisy error often produces “speckled” artifacts in the flood maps, commonly in areas that should show complete inundation. Removing non-connected areas in these places could greatly underestimate the potential for flood exposure. For this reason, in these regions, the only areas removed from the map and excluded from analysis are separated from the ocean by a ridge of at least 20 meters (66 feet) above the local high tide line, according to the data, so coastal flooding would almost certainly be impossible (e.g., the Caspian Sea region).Back to topData LayersWater Level | Projections | Legend | Social Vulnerability | Population | Ethnicity | Income | Property | LandmarksWater LevelWater level means feet or meters above the local high tide line (“Mean Higher High Water”) instead of standard elevation. Methods described above explain how each map is generated based on a selected water level. Water can reach different levels in different time frames through combinations of sea level rise, tide and storm surge. Tide gauges shown on the map show related projections (see just below).The highest water levels on this map (10, 20 and 30 meters) provide reference points for possible flood risk from tsunamis, in regions prone to them.

This is a tiled collection of the 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) and is one meter resolution. The 3DEP data holdings serve as the elevation layer of The National Map, and provide foundational elevation information for earth science studies and mapping applications in the United States. Scientists and resource managers use 3DEP data for hydrologic modeling, resource monitoring, mapping and visualization, and many other applications. The elevations in this DEM represent the topographic bare-earth surface. USGS standard one-meter DEMs are produced exclusively from high resolution light detection and ranging (lidar) source data of one-meter or higher resolution. One-meter DEM surfaces are seamless within collection projects, but, not necessarily seamless across projects. The spatial reference used for tiles of the one-meter DEM within the conterminous United States (CONUS) is Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) in units of meters, and in conformance with the North American Datum of 1983 ...

United States US: Land Area Where Elevation is Below 5 Meters: % of Total Land Area data was reported at 1.168 % in 2010. This stayed constant from the previous number of 1.168 % for 2000. United States US: Land Area Where Elevation is Below 5 Meters: % of Total Land Area data is updated yearly, averaging 1.168 % from Dec 1990 (Median) to 2010, with 3 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 1.168 % in 2010 and a record low of 1.168 % in 2010. United States US: Land Area Where Elevation is Below 5 Meters: % of Total Land Area data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.World Bank: Land Use, Protected Areas and National Wealth. Land area below 5m is the percentage of total land where the elevation is 5 meters or less.; ; Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN)/Columbia University. 2013. Urban-Rural Population and Land Area Estimates Version 2. Palisades, NY: NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC). http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/data/set/lecz-urban-rural-population-land-area-estimates-v2.; Weighted Average;

This is a tiled collection of the 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) and is 1/3 arc-second (approximately 10 m) resolution. The 3DEP data holdings serve as the elevation layer of The National Map, and provide foundational elevation information for earth science studies and mapping applications in the United States. Scientists and resource managers use 3DEP data for hydrologic modeling, resource monitoring, mapping and visualization, and many other applications. The elevations in this DEM represent the topographic bare-earth surface. The seamless 1/3 arc-second DEM layers are derived from diverse source data that are processed to a common coordinate system and unit of vertical measure. These data are distributed in geographic coordinates in units of decimal degrees, and in conformance with the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83). All elevation values are in meters and, over the continental United States, are referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88). The seamless ...

This dataset was created to represent the land surface elevation at 1:24,000 scale for Florida. The elevation contour lines representing the land surface elevation were digitized from United States Geological survey 1:24,000 (7.5 minute) quadrangles and were compiled by South Florida, South West Florida, St. Johns River and Suwannee River Water Management Districts and FDEP. QA and corrections to the data were supplied by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Florida Geological Survey and the Division of Water Resource Management. This data, representing over 1,000 USGS topographic maps, spans a variety of contour intervals including 1 and 2 meter and 5 and 10 foot. The elevation values have been normalized to feet in the final data layer. Attributes for closed topographic depressions were also captured where closed (hautchered) features were identified and the lowest elevation determined using the closest contour line minus one-half the contour interval. This data was derived from the USGS 1:24,000 topographic map series. The data is more than 20 years old and is likely out-of-date in areas of high human activity.

This dataset contains the Digital Elevation Model (DEM) for North America from the Hydrologic Derivatives for Modeling and Analysis (HDMA) database. The DEM data were developed and distributed by processing units. There are 13 processing units for North America. The distribution files have the number of the processing unit appended to the end of the zip file name (e.g. na_dem_3_2.zip contains the DEM data for unit 3-2). The HDMA database provides comprehensive and consistent global coverage of raster and vector topographically derived layers, including raster layers of digital elevation model (DEM) data, flow direction, flow accumulation, slope, and compound topographic index (CTI); and vector layers of streams and catchment boundaries. The coverage of the data is global (-180º, 180º, -90º, 90º) with the underlying DEM being a hybrid of three datasets: HydroSHEDS (Hydrological data and maps based on SHuttle Elevation Derivatives at multiple Scales), Global Multi-resolution Terrain Elevation Data 2010 (GMTED2010) and the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM). For most of the globe south of 60º North, the raster resolution of the data is 3-arc-seconds, corresponding to the resolution of the SRTM. For the areas North of 60º, the resolution is 7.5-arc-seconds (the smallest resolution of the GMTED2010 dataset) except for Greenland, where the resolution is 30-arc-seconds. The streams and catchments are attributed with Pfafstetter codes, based on a hierarchical numbering system, that carry important topological information.

United States US: Population Living in Areas Where Elevation is Below 5 Meters: % of Total Population data was reported at 2.513 % in 2010. This records an increase from the previous number of 2.502 % for 2000. United States US: Population Living in Areas Where Elevation is Below 5 Meters: % of Total Population data is updated yearly, averaging 2.513 % from Dec 1990 (Median) to 2010, with 3 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 2.575 % in 1990 and a record low of 2.502 % in 2000. United States US: Population Living in Areas Where Elevation is Below 5 Meters: % of Total Population data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.World Bank: Land Use, Protected Areas and National Wealth. Population below 5m is the percentage of the total population living in areas where the elevation is 5 meters or less.; ; Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN)/Columbia University. 2013. Urban-Rural Population and Land Area Estimates Version 2. Palisades, NY: NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC). http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/data/set/lecz-urban-rural-population-land-area-estimates-v2.; Weighted Average;

United States US: Urban Population Living in Areas Where Elevation is Below 5 meters: % of Total Population data was reported at 2.264 % in 2010. This records an increase from the previous number of 2.246 % for 2000. United States US: Urban Population Living in Areas Where Elevation is Below 5 meters: % of Total Population data is updated yearly, averaging 2.264 % from Dec 1990 (Median) to 2010, with 3 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 2.329 % in 1990 and a record low of 2.246 % in 2000. United States US: Urban Population Living in Areas Where Elevation is Below 5 meters: % of Total Population data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.World Bank: Land Use, Protected Areas and National Wealth. Urban population below 5m is the percentage of the total population, living in areas where the elevation is 5 meters or less.; ; Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN)/Columbia University. 2013. Urban-Rural Population and Land Area Estimates Version 2. Palisades, NY: NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC). http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/data/set/lecz-urban-rural-population-land-area-estimates-v2.; Weighted Average;

Imagery acquired with unmanned aerial systems (UAS) and coupled with structure from motion (SfM) photogrammetry can produce high-resolution topographic and visual reflectance datasets that rival or exceed lidar and orthoimagery. These new techniques are particularly useful for data collection of coastal systems, which requires high temporal and spatial resolution datasets. The U.S. Geological Survey worked in collaboration with members of the Marine Biological Laboratory and Woods Hole Analytics at Black Beach, in Falmouth, Massachusetts to explore scientific research demands on UAS technology for topographic and habitat mapping applications. This project explored the application of consumer-grade UAS platforms as a cost-effective alternative to lidar and aerial/satellite imagery to support coastal studies requiring high-resolution elevation or remote sensing data. A small UAS was used to capture low-altitude photographs and GPS devices were used to survey reference points. These data were processed in an SfM workflow to create an elevation point cloud, an orthomosaic image, and a digital elevation model.

This dataset is about: Climate data for high and low elevation sites across western North America. Please consult parent dataset @ https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.846558 for more information.

This dataset provides maps of the elevation of coastal wetlands relative to tidal ranges for the conterminous United States (CONUS) at 30 m resolution for 2010. It also includes maps of tidal amplitude, relative sea-level rise for the period 1983-2001, and maps for coastal lands and low marsh areas based on the probability of being below the mean higher high tide water line for spring tides (MHHWS). Uncertainty layers for elevation maps are also provided.

At 20,310 feet (6.2km) above sea level, the highest point in the United States is Denali, Alaska (formerly known as Mount McKinley). The highest point in the contiguous United States is Mount Whitney, in the Sierra Nevada mountain range in California; followed by Mount Elbert, Colorado - the highest point in the Rocky Mountains. When looking at the highest point in each state, the 13 tallest peaks are all found in the western region of the country, while there is much more diversity across the other regions and territories.

Despite being approximately 6,500 feet lower than Denali, Hawaii's Mauna Kea is sometimes considered the tallest mountain (and volcano) on earth. This is because its base is well below sea level - the mountain has a total height of 33,474 feet, which is almost 4,500 feet higher than Mount Everest.

Modifications were made to an existing Lake Michigan topobathy data set to interpolate areas of missing near shore elevation data. Areas with missing elevation data were not interpolated where there was low confidence in the underlying depth. This included rivers, canals, harbors, lakes, reservoirs, etc. Areas important for targeting Phragmites australis management often lie within these aquatic/terrestrial transition zones. The original topobathy data were created as part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office for Coastal Management's efforts to create an online mapping viewer called the NOAA Lake Level Viewer. It depicts potential lake level rise and fall and its associated impacts on the nation's coastal areas. The base elevation data were the best available lidar and US Army Corps of Engineer dredge survey data known to exist at the time of DEM creation that met project specifications. The base elevation includes data for Alcona, Alpena, Arenac, Bay, C ...

Coral reefs serve as natural barriers that protect adjacent shorelines from coastal hazards such as storms, waves and erosion but projections indicate global degradation of coral reefs due to anthropogenic impacts and climate change will cause a transition to net erosion by mid-century. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center conducted research to quantify the combined effect of all constructive and destructive processes on modern coral reef ecosystems by measuring regional-scale changes in seafloor elevation. USGS staff assessed five coral reef ecosystems in the Atlantic Ocean (Upper and Lower Florida Keys), Caribbean Sea (U.S. Virgin Islands: St. Thomas and Buck Island, St. Croix), and Pacific Ocean (Maui, Hawaii), including both coral-dominated and adjacent, non-coral dominated habitats. Scientists used historical bathymetric data from the 1930s to 1980s and contemporary light detection and ranging (lidar) digital elevation models (DEMs) from the late 1990s to 2000s to calculate changes in seafloor elevation for each study site over time periods reflecting low to high anthropogenic impacts. STT_ElevationChange.zip contains the _location, elevation, and elevation change data for St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. Using these changes in elevation, further analysis was done to calculate corresponding changes in seafloor volume for all study areas and habitat types within each site.

Increased frequency and intensity of storms, saltwater intrusion, sea level rise, and warming temperatures are affecting forests along the mid-Atlantic, Southeastern, and Gulf coasts of the US. However, we still lack a clear understanding of how the structure of coastal forests is being altered by climate change drivers. Here, we used data from the Forest Inventory and Analyses program of the United States Forest Service to examine structure and biomass change in forests along the mid-Atlantic, Southeastern, and Gulf coasts of the US. We selected plots that have been resampled at low (5 m) and mid (30-50 m) elevations in coastal areas of states from Texas to New Jersey, allowing us to determine change in live trees, standing dead wood, and downed dead wood biomass (and carbon) stocks across a decade. We estimated forest attributes at the county level for each elevational class. Forest area increased by 1.9% in low elevation counties and by 0.3% in mid elevation counties. Live tree biomass density increased by 13% in low elevation counties, and by 16% in mid elevation counties. Standing dead biomass decreased in low elevation counties by 9.2% and by 2.8% in mid elevation counties. On average, downed dead wood increased by 22% in low elevation counties and decreased by 50% in mid elevation counties. Changes in the stock of C in standing and downed dead wood (0.45 to 9.1 Tg C) are similar to soil marsh C loss (9.54 Tg C). Annualized growth and harvest were both higher (16% and 58% respectively) in mid elevation counties than low elevation counties, while annualized mortality was 25% higher in low elevation counties. Annualized growth in low elevation counties was negatively correlated to sea level rise rates, and positively correlated to number of storms, illustrating tradeoffs associated with different climate change drivers. Overall, our results illustrate the vulnerability of US southeastern coastal low and mid elevation forests to climate change and sea level rise with indications that the complexity and rate of change in associated ecosystem functions (e.g., growth, mortality, and carbon storage) within the greater social environment (e.g., agricultural abandonment) may increase. Methods We used data from the National Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) program which, administered by the USDA Forest Service, provides a comprehensive statistical inventory and associated database of forests across the United States. The program applies standardized techniques to measure forest characteristics across a national plot sampling network of approximately one plot per 2,428 ha, with plot locations determined using a hexagonal sampling framework designed to be as spatially balanced as possible. The plot location within each 2,428 ha hexagon was visited by field crews if remotely sensed data indicated it was in forest land use (having ≥ 10% tree canopy cover, or evidence of such cover) that was at least 0.4 ha in area and 37 m wide. We focused on data for the mid-Atlantic and Southeast coast of the US, from Texas to New Jersey. We selected information from forested plots located in low (~5m) and mid elevation (30-50 m) areas with slopes less than 15%, and had either hydric conditions, or were near a water feature, which are indicative of forested wetlands. We used the FIA methodologies to estimate forest resources attributes from plot level to the county level. We looked at changes in live trees (biomass and C), standing dead wood (SD, biomass and C), and downed dead wood (biomass and C, DD). The systematic FIA sample design further allowed for statistical population-level estimates of various forest attributes, such as the area of a low-elevation forest in a county, using an “expansion factor” assigned to each plot condition. Using a design-based approach to population inference, expansion factors can be summed across plots in a population to provide an estimate of the total area within that population. Similarly, the FIA sample design allows individual trees inventoried on plots to be scaled via an expansion factor to estimate the total C of trees within an area. In this case, we calculated the area and biomass (from standing live, standing dead, and downed dead) of low-elevation and mid-elevation forests in low-elevation and mid-elevation counties, respectively, and within each state. Field crews collected a wide variety of data using standardized protocols from each FIA plot, which covered 0.067 hectares within four 7.31-m radius subplots arranged at the vertices and center of a triangle. This included the diameter, height, and species for every live and dead tree with a diameter at breast height (DBH) ≥ 12.7 cm. All trees with DBH ≥ 2.54 cm but < 12.7 cm were measured in a single 2.07-m-radius microplot within each of the plot’s four subplots. Using the component ratio method, the FIA program estimates the aboveground dry biomass of each tree with DBH ≥ 2.54 cm in pounds. Biomass and C densities were calculated by scaling plot-level data to per hectare estimates for the counties. We estimated change in the stocks of different pools by subtracting time 2 from time 1. We also looked at changes in different size classes and decay classes (for dead wood). We used data from the two latest survey evaluation periods, spanning a decade of change (Table 1). We estimated forest biomass standing stocks and change among key structural components using data from 1700 plots in low elevation counties and 3200 plots in mid elevation counties. We estimated population level values for 126 low elevation counties and 179 mid elevation counties (Fig 1). We excluded counties for which there were less than three plots in any survey year. To examine potential climate change drivers of forest dynamics we used publicly available datasets. We obtained sea level rise rates for 43 of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) tide gauges from the Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level (PSMSL, Supplementary Table 1). We used the website to estimate rates of sea level rise from 2010-2020 to match the FIA dataset, given reports of accelerating rates of sea level rise in the Southeastern US. We calculated mean annual temperature and mean annual precipitation from the GridMet dataset (4 km2 spatial resolution), accessed through the Climate Engine portal (https://app.climateengine.org/climateEngine) for the period 2010-2020, to roughly match the FIA measurements. We also estimated change in temperature and precipitation by estimating the sen slope of each factor over the same time period using the Climate Engine portal. We used the NOAA National Hurricane Center Atlantic Hurricane Catalog (HURDAT2), accessed through Google Earth Engine, to count the number of tropical cyclones that passed through a 100 km radius buffer of the NOAA tide gauges for the same period. On average, low elevation counties were located 22.4 ± 2.6 km, while mid elevation counties were 108 ± 5.9 km from the NOAA tide gauges.

The vertical land change activity focuses on the detection, analysis, and explanation of topographic change. These detection techniques include both quantitative methods, for example, using difference metrics derived from multi-temporal topographic digital elevation models (DEMs), such as, light detection and ranging (lidar), National Elevation Dataset (NED), Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM), and Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (IFSAR), and qualitative methods, for example, using multi-temporal aerial photography to visualize topographic change. The geographic study areas of this activity are in Chippewa, Eau Claire, Jackson, Monroe, Trempealeau, and Wood counties in west central Wisconsin. Available multi-temporal lidar, NED, SRTM, IFSAR, and other topographic elevation datasets, as well as aerial photography and multi-spectral image data were identified and downloaded for these study area counties. Locations of industrial sand mines and processing plants (vector features) were obtained from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources at http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/Mines/ISMMap.html, and from the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism, October 2012, update at https://fusiontables.google.com/DataSource?docid=17nDFI4iUPOdyDOEWU7Vu1ONMiVofa3aWR_Gs-Zk#rows:id=1. These features were used to spatially validate some of the mining locations that were predefined with Landsat-detected mining locations (polygons). Previously developed differencing methods (Gesch, 2006) were used to develop difference raster datasets of NED/SRTM (1961-2000 date range) and SRTM/IFSAR (2000-2008 date range). The difference rasters were evaluated to exclude difference values that were below a specified vertical change threshold, which was applied spatially by National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD) 1992 and 2006 land cover type, respectively. This spatial application of the vertical change threshold values improved the overall ability to detect vertical change because threshold values in bare earth areas were distinguished from threshold values in heavily vegetated areas. Lidar point cloud data and high-resolution (1-3 m) lidar DEMs were acquired for the Wisconsin six-county study area from Chippewa County Land Records Division, Chippewa Falls, WI; Eau Claire County, Eau Claire, WI; Jackson County and Jackson County Land Information Council, Black River Falls, WI; Monroe County, Sparta, WI; Trempealeau County, Whitehall, WI; and Wood County Planning and Zoning, Wisconsin Rapids, WI. ESRI Mosaic Datasets were generated from lidar point-cloud data and available topographic DEMs for the specified study areas. These data were analyzed to estimate volumetric changes on the land surface at three different periods with lidar acquisitions collected for Chippewa County, WI on May 15, 2011 and April 14, 2012; Eau Claire County, WI in 2013; Jackson County, WI in April, 2015; Monroe County, WI April 11-12, 2010; Trempealeau County, WI April 26, 2014 to May 5, 2014; and Wood County, WI March 21-31, 2015. The most recent difference analysis consisting of a raster dataset time span (2008-2015 date range) was analyzed by differencing the Wisconsin lidar-derived DEMs and an IFSAR-derived dataset. The IFSAR-derived data were resampled to the resolution of the lidar DEM (approximately 1-m resolution) and compared with the lidar-derived DEM. Land cover based threshold values were applied spatially to detect vertical change using the IFSAR/lidar difference dataset. Chippewa County lidar DEM metadata reported the root mean square error (RMSE) of 0.083 m. Eau Claire County lidar DEM metadata described an RMSE of 18.5 cm that supports 2 ft contours. Jackson County lidar DEM metadata reported that a comparison of the ground survey versus lidar model values indicated an RMSE of 0.214 ft (0.065 m). Monroe County lidar DEM metadata was obtained from the U.S. Interagency Elevation Inventory, which indicated an RMSE of 0.106 m. Trempealeau County lidar DEM included metadata describing RMSE values for different land cover types. A comparison of the Trempealeau ground survey versus lidar model values indicated an overall vertical RMSE of 0.344 ft (0.105 m). An RMSE was reported for each of the following land cover types in Trempealeau County: Urban: 0.169 US Survey Feet (0.051 m); Low Grass: 0.150 US Survey Feet (0.046 m); Tall Grass: 0.489 US Survey Feet (0.149 m); Low Trees: 0.432 US Survey Feet (0.132 m); Tall Trees: 0.342 US Survey Feet (0.104 m). This allowed additional refinement of the spatially explicit threshold values. Wood County lidar DEM RMSE was obtained from the US Interagency Elevation Inventory (0.122 m).References: Gesch, Dean B., 2006, An inventory and assessment of significant topographic changes in the United States Brookings, S. Dak., South Dakota State University, Ph.D. dissertation, 234 p, at https://topotools.cr.usgs.gov/pdfs/DGesch_dissertation_Nov2006.pdf.

The land surface forms were identified using the method developed by the Missouri Resource Assessment Partnership (MoRAP). The MoRAP method is an automated land surface form classification based on Hammonds (1964a, 1964b) classification. MoRAP made modifications to Hammonds classification, which allowed finer-resolution elevation data to be used as input data and analyses to be made using 1 km2 moving window (True, 2002; True et al., 2000). While Hammonds methodology was based on three variables, slope, local relief, and profile type, MoRAPs methodology uses only slope and local relief (True, 2002). Slope is classified as gently sloping or not gently sloping using a threshold value of 8%. Local relief, the difference between the maximum and minimum elevation in a 1km2 neighborhood for analysis, is classified into five classes (0-15m, 16-30m, 31-90m, 91-150m, and >150m). Slope classes and relief classes were subsequently combined to produce eight land surface form classes (flat plains, smooth plains, irregular plains, escarpments, low hills, hills, breaks/foothills, and low mountains). In the implementation for the contiguous United States, Sayre et al. (2009) further refined the MoRAP methodology to identify a new land surface form class, "high mountains/deep canyons", by using an additional local relief class (>400 m). This method was implemented for Africa using a void-filled 90m SRTM elevation dataset which was created from the 30m SRTM elevation data provided by the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency. In the preliminary output, which had nine land surface form classes (flat plains, smooth plains, irregular plains, escarpments, low hills, hills, breaks/foothills, and low mountains, and high mountains/deep canyons), artifacts were identified over flat desert areas affecting the classification between the two lowest relief classes, "flat plains" and "smooth plains." Since this problem was especially pronounced in areas where the input SRTM elevation data originally had data-voids, the problem could have been caused by anomalies or artifacts in the input data, which resulted from the void-filling processes. Instead of further investigating causes of the problem, the two land surface form classes were combined. In addition, the "low hills" class which had a very low occurrence was combined with the "hills" class. As a result, seven land surface form classes were identified in the final dataset (smooth plains, irregular plains, escarpments, hills, breaks/foothills, low mountains, and high mountains/deep canyons).

References

Hammond, E.H., 1964a. Analysis of Properties in Land Form Geography - An Application to Broad-Scale Land Form Mapping. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, v. 54, no. 1, p. 11-19.

Hammond, E.H. 1964b. Classes of land surface form in the forty-eight states, U.S.A. Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 54(1), map supplement no. 4, 1:5,000,000.

Sayre, R., P. Comer, H. Warner, and J. Cress. 2009. A new map of standardized terrestrial ecosystems of the conterminous United States, U. S. Geological Survey professional Paper 1768, 17 p.

True, D. 2002. Landforms of the Lower Mid-West. Missouri Resource Assessment Partnership. MoRAP Map Series MS-2003-001, scale 1:1,500,000.

True, D., T. Gordon, and D. Diamond. 2000. How the size of a sliding window impacts the generation of landforms. Missouri Resources Assessment Partnership.

A digital elevation model (DEM) of a portion of the north shore of Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana, was produced from remotely sensed, geographically referenced elevation measurements by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Elevation measurements were collected over the area on February 28, March 1, and March 5, 2010, using the Experimental Advanced Airborne Research Lidar (EAARL), a pulsed laser ranging system mounted onboard an aircraft to measure ground elevation, vegetation canopy, and coastal topography. The system uses high-frequency laser beams directed at the Earth's surface through an opening in the bottom of the aircraft's fuselage. The laser system records the time difference between emission of the laser beam and the reception of the reflected laser signal in the aircraft. The plane travels over the target area at approximately 50 meters per second at an elevation of approximately 300 meters, resulting in a laser swath of approximately 240 meters with an average point spacing of 2-3 meters. The EAARL, developed originally by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) at Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia, measures ground elevation with a vertical resolution of +/-15 centimeters. A sampling rate of 3 kilohertz or higher results in an extremely dense spatial elevation dataset. Over 100 kilometers of coastline can be surveyed easily within a 3- to 4-hour mission. When resultant elevation maps for an area are analyzed, they provide a useful tool to make management decisions regarding land development. The data provided represent the last return pulses and were processed and filtered for bare-earth topography. However, in low-lying and emerging vegetation environments, bare-earth topography is not necessarily discernible from the last-return pulses. The difference in water levels between data collections on February 28, March 1, and March 5 resulted in elevation variations in the merged data.