EarthScope - get involved and tell your elected

[Patrick Tami]

Next week (May 14 - 15), there is a Congressional briefing on the first 10 years of the EarthScope science project, and a look forward at the next 5 years, in Washington D.C.

Dr. Glen Mattioli, UNAVCO Director of Geodetic Infrastructure, said the future of the extensive infrastructure and instrumentation installed by UNAVCO for the EarthScope project is very unclear at this time, especially as the end of the final 5 year cooperative agreement for funding from National Science Foundation (NSF) approaches in September, 2018. All of the states represented in our region have developed some level of reliance on UNAVCO CGPS stations for geodetic control. In California, almost 75% of the CGPS/CORS stations, and 72% of the NGS CORS stations are operated and maintained by UNAVCO and funded by the NSF.

As non-Federal stakeholders, we are encouraged to contact our elected representatives (Federal) to inform them of these events and why the long term viability of this infrastructure is critical to state (or local) missions, such as for Real Time Network services and DOT or other large infrastructure and public works projects, as well as many other applications reliant on accurate geospatial positions. Without hearing from their constituents, these elected officials may not think it important to attend these events or make the connection as to how the EarthScope project has been beneficial to the regions they represent. Private entities are encouraged to make these contacts as well.

Please distribute to your colleagues who you believe also have a vested interest in the long term viability of the tremendous investment UNAVCO has made across our region, from which we all have benefitted. And take time to call or email your Congressional representatives and U.S. Senators to get them involved to protect YOUR interests.

Thank you.

[E_Page]

In California, almost 75% of the CGPS/CORS stations, and 72% of the NGS CORS stations are operated and maintained by UNAVCO and funded by the NSF.

I was not aware of this. I'll contact my congresscritter, but first I'd like to get a little more background. Where's a good place to start?

[SPMPLS]

Evan,

What type of background information are you looking for? You could take a look at the presentation given at the fall CSRC meeting by the UNAVCO Director of Geodetic Infrastructure, Dr. Glen Mattioli, posted here:

http://csrc.ucsd.edu/input/csrc/presentations/2013-10/4_PBO_Mattioli_Oct2013.pdf

The one he gave at the League of California Surveying Organizations annual Geospatial Symposium on April 3, 2014 should be posted here soon - similar material, same message - funding expires 9/30/2018:

http://www.lcso.com/current_agenda.htm

The UNAVCO budget was cut this year by 9% relative to the 2012 base funding and approximately 20% from what was requested. This has resulted in the loss of the three PBO staff positions, deferred station maintenance, turning off Real Time stations, and decommssioning stations of lesser scientific importance. It also mean that the plan to upgrade about 400 more stations to Real Time (currently have about 400 Real Time stations) and to replace about 500 of the 900 obsolete NetRS receivers and do antenna upgrades have been put on hold indefinitely. Because these receivers are no longer supported by the manufacturer and the available parts supply has been depleted, when receivers fail, they won't be replaced, or repair parts may be harvested from another station of lesser scientific importance, the net result being a loss of a station. With maintenance being deferred, this scenario will likely increase in frequency as time goes on.

[E_Page]

That's what I was looking for. I just want to be able to hit highlights of the systems importance to matters that my congressman will recognize and understand, have facts on the real budget (9% actual "cut" in addition to the 20% less than requested - the figure that a congresscritter would cite as the "cut" if it were a politically advantageous pet project), and the projected consequences of future cuts - enough info to explain the effect of the loss in terms of effort/costs in public works private development projects. If I can put it in clear terms about the effect on jobs and on private economic activity, I'm sure my copngressman will take notice. If I put it in terms of public sector economic activity, our senators may take notice.

Thanks for the links.

[Peter Wiseman]

For those of you not sure whom your congressperson is here is a link to easily find out.
http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/

I encourage you all to send an email today to urge your representative to attend the briefings and support the Earthscope project.