DOCSLIB.ORG

Usfs-Fy-2021-Budget-Justification.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Usfs-Fy-2021-Budget-Justification.Pdf 2021 USDA EXPLANATORY NOTES – FOREST SERVICE 1 In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720- 2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: [email protected]. USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender. Cover design photo credits Main Photo View of the Milky Way over Cathedral Rock, seen from the Cathedral Rock Trailhead on Back O' Beyond Road, Sedona, Arizona. Cathedral Rock is a prominent rock formation located on the Coconino National Forest between Sedona and the Village of Oak Creek, Arizona. Both towns are certified International Dark Sky Communities, abiding by lighting ordinances that help protect northern Arizona's dark skies for local observatories, astronomers, and star gazers. Forest Service photo by Deborah Lee Soltesz. Smaller photos - left to right A national forest guest participates in activities lead by Forest Service employees. Forest Service photo. A Forest Service employee helps put out fires at the Happy Camp Complex on the Klamath National Forest. Forest Service photo. Forest Service Fire Management Officer Patrick Scott, at a timber sale on the North Mills Area, Pisgah Ranger District, Pisgah National Forest. Forest Service photo by Cecilio Ricardo. Top: A Forest Service employee interacts with a guest at a national forest. Photo by Gerald Heinrich, Midewin Interpretive Association. Bottom: A Forest Service employee at First Creek Fire on Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest. Forest Service photo. Top: A member of the Youth Conservation Corps explores a national park. Forest Service Photo. Bottom: A man mountain bikes near Wade Lake on the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest. USDA Photo by Preston Keres. 2021 USDA EXPLANATORY NOTES – FOREST SERVICE 2021 USDA EXPLANATORY NOTES – FOREST SERVICE Agency-Wide ................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Budget Overview ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose Statement .................................................................................................................................................... 3 Lead-Off Tabular Statements ................................................................................................................................... 5 Four-Year Summary of Appropriations and 2021 Pay, Awards and FERS Increases ............................................. 6 Four-Year Summary of Staff Years (SY) .............................................................................................................. 10 Revenue, Receipts and Transfers ........................................................................................................................... 12 Organization Chart ................................................................................................................................................. 13 Available Funds and Staff Years............................................................................................................................ 14 Permanent Positions by Grade and Staff Years ..................................................................................................... 16 Vehicle Fleet .......................................................................................................................................................... 17 Shared Funding Projects ........................................................................................................................................ 19 Forest and Rangeland Research ...................................................................................................................................21 Lead-Off Tabular Statement .................................................................................................................................. 21 Appropriations Language ....................................................................................................................................... 21 Project Statement ................................................................................................................................................... 22 Justifications of Increases and Decreases............................................................................................................... 23 Classification By Objects ....................................................................................................................................... 26 Status of Programs ................................................................................................................................................. 27 State and Private Forestry ............................................................................................................................................31 Lead-Off Tabular Statement .................................................................................................................................. 31 Appropriations Language ....................................................................................................................................... 31 Project Statement ................................................................................................................................................... 32 Justifications of Increases and Decreases............................................................................................................... 33 Classification By Objects ....................................................................................................................................... 38 Status of Programs ................................................................................................................................................. 39 National Forest System ................................................................................................................................................47 Lead-Off Tabular Statement .................................................................................................................................. 47 Appropriations Language ....................................................................................................................................... 47 Project Statement ................................................................................................................................................... 48 Justifications of Increases and Decreases............................................................................................................... 50 Classification By Objects ....................................................................................................................................... 56 Status of Programs ................................................................................................................................................. 57 Capital Improvement and Maintenance .......................................................................................................................69 Lead-Off Tabular Statement .................................................................................................................................. 69 Appropriations Language ....................................................................................................................................... 69 i 2021 USDA EXPLANATORY NOTES – FOREST SERVICE Project Statement ................................................................................................................................................... 70 Justifications of Increases and Decreases..............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Star Gazers Fly Me to the Moon Living the Dream Mission: Mars
    1 Star Gazers 2 Fly Me to the Moon Dreams Dreams So now that you have your telescope and you can see what’s up in the sky, When you look up at the stars and imagine what it’s like up there, you're doing what wouldn’t you like to travel there? many, many people all over the world have done throughout history. Tools U Tools S A In 1609 Galileo was one of those curious In 1969 scientists and engineers at NASA succeeded in getting scientists -- like you. He used a telescope to get a a person to the moon, but they had to build a very powerful closer look and improved it so that he could see rocket to get there. even better. Adventure Adventure You can build your own rocket and overcome the force of gravity. You can make things look bigger than they really are. You will need: packing tape, oblong shaped balloon, paper cup, plastic drinking straw (2" section) a friend for a lab partner, 12’ You will need: newspaper, wax paper, clear plastic cups, piece of string, clear tape, scissors, hardback book, 8 1/2" x 11" water, lenses you can find around the house. writing paper, paper clip. Tape 1. Place the newspaper on the table. Put a sheet of wax 1. Using packing tape, fasten one end cup paper over the newspaper. Carefully put a drop of water of the string to the top of a doorframe. Drinking on the wax paper – just a drop. Straw 2. Blow up the balloon.
    [Show full text]
  • IMBCR Report
    Integrated Monitoring in Bird Conservation Regions (IMBCR): 2015 Field Season Report June 2016 Bird Conservancy of the Rockies 14500 Lark Bunting Lane Brighton, CO 80603 303-659-4348 www.birdconservancy.org Tech. Report # SC-IMBCR-06 Bird Conservancy of the Rockies Connecting people, birds and land Mission: Conserving birds and their habitats through science, education and land stewardship Vision: Native bird populations are sustained in healthy ecosystems Bird Conservancy of the Rockies conserves birds and their habitats through an integrated approach of science, education and land stewardship. Our work radiates from the Rockies to the Great Plains, Mexico and beyond. Our mission is advanced through sound science, achieved through empowering people, realized through stewardship and sustained through partnerships. Together, we are improving native bird populations, the land and the lives of people. Core Values: 1. Science provides the foundation for effective bird conservation. 2. Education is critical to the success of bird conservation. 3. Stewardship of birds and their habitats is a shared responsibility. Goals: 1. Guide conservation action where it is needed most by conducting scientifically rigorous monitoring and research on birds and their habitats within the context of their full annual cycle. 2. Inspire conservation action in people by developing relationships through community outreach and science-based, experiential education programs. 3. Contribute to bird population viability and help sustain working lands by partnering with landowners and managers to enhance wildlife habitat. 4. Promote conservation and inform land management decisions by disseminating scientific knowledge and developing tools and recommendations. Suggested Citation: White, C. M., M. F. McLaren, N. J.
    [Show full text]
  • Changed Astronomy P
    Citizen Science: LUNAR Solargraphy: CAPTURE Abell 2065: THE CHALLENGE ECLIPSE RESULTS p. 28 THE SUN IN A CAN p. 38 OF THE UNCHARTED p. 60 THE ESSENTIAL GUIDE TO ASTRONOMY JUNE 2015 7 Ways HUBBLE Changed Astronomy p. 20 The Lunar Science of Jules Verne p. 32 Splitting the Stars of the Serpent’s Head p. 56 US $5.99 CAN $6.99 06 Saturn in Your Scope p. 50 Celestron’s Newest Astrograph p. 66 FnL1 03 0084 01 CUYrVyBNZWRpYQ9HcmVnb3J5IEtydWVn 02 ZXIAVPbEIwQxMC40AjgwATEFVVBDLUEM MDc0ODA4MDIyMDc2kQ== 0 74808 02207 6 Display until June 1, 2015 Visit SkyandTelescope.com Download Our Free SkyWeek App The Reality of Make-Believe ScienceThe of Jules Ver ne’s Dean Fiction Regas Nineteenth-century science and technology shaped two classic tales of imaginary spacefl ight. Under a Floridian sky, three astronauts boarded their fi ction stories provide an illuminating window into 19th- metallic spacecraft. As throngs of well-wishers nervously century scientifi c knowledge. looked on, at the awaited moment the crew blasted The year is 1865, and Verne introduces the Gun up, up into the warm, clear air — soaring toward the Club, a fi ctional organization in Baltimore. The club’s Moon. Flying where no human had gone before, they members (who possess, according to one account, “not approached the cratered lunar surface, orbited around quite one arm between four persons and exactly two legs the silvery orb, and beheld the farside of the Moon. between six”) are artillery specialists who lament the Then the spacecraft returned to Earth and plunged into end of the Civil War.
    [Show full text]
  • Adams V. Alliant Techsystems, Inc
    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION HARRY ADAMS, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) Civil Action No. 7:99CV00813 ) v. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION ) ALLIANT TECHSYSTEMS INC., and ) By: Samuel G. Wilson HERCULES INCORPORATED, ) Chief United States District Judge ) Defendants. ) This is a personal injury action brought by plaintiffs, employees or former employees at the Radford Army Ammunition Plant (“Arsenal”), against defendants, Alliant Techsystems, Inc. and Hercules Incorporated, for hearing loss plaintiffs allegedly suffered while working at the Plant. On May 7, 2002, this court entered a memorandum opinion granting in part and denying in part defendants’ first motion for summary judgment. This matter is before the court on plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration. Plaintiffs argue that the court erroneously decided that Virginia’s statute of limitation applied to their claims because: (1) not all of the Arsenal is a federal enclave under the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States and governed by 16 U.S.C. § 457, (2) the defendants agreed not to assert Virginia’s statute of limitations, (3) 16 U.S.C. § 457 does not make Virginia’s statute of limitations applicable to these claims, and (4) even if Virginia’s statute of limitations applies, there are questions of fact for the jury regarding fraudulent concealment that would toll Virginia’s statute of limitations. For the reasons stated below the court will not reconsider its summary judgment opinion. I. Plaintiffs’ argument that part of the Arsenal is not on a federal enclave subject to the National Parks Act, 16 U.S.C. § 457, is a new one, not raised while the summary judgment motion was pending.
    [Show full text]
  • Fiscal Year 2016-‐2017 Accountability Report
    AGENCY NAME: South Carolina Forestry Commission AGENCY CODE: P120 SECTION: 043 Fiscal Year 2016-2017 AcCountability Report SUBMISSION FORM The mission of the South Carolina Forestry Commission is to protect, promote, enhance, and nurture the woodlands of SC, and to educate the public about forestry issues, in a manner consistent with achieving the greatest good for its citizens. AGENCY MISSION Across all ownerships, South Carolina’s forest resources are managed sustainably to support an expanding forest products manufacturing industry while providing environmental services such as clean air, clean water, recreation and wildlife habitat. AGENCY VISION Please select yes or no if the agency has any major or minor (internal or external) recommendations that would allow the agency to operate more effectively and efficiently. Yes No RESTRUCTURING RECOMMENDATIONS: ☐ ☒ Please identify your agency’s preferred contacts for this year’s accountability report. Name Phone Email PRIMARY CONTACT: Doug Wood (803) 896-8820 [email protected] SECONDARY CONTACT: Tom Patton (803) 896-8849 [email protected] A-1 AGENCY NAME: South Carolina Forestry Commission AGENCY CODE: P120 SECTION: 043 I have reviewed and approved the enclosed FY 2016-2017 Accountability Report, which is complete and accurate to the extent of my knowledge. AGENCY DIRECTOR (SIGN AND DATE): (TYPE OR PRINT Henry E. “Gene” Kodama NAME): BOARD/CMSN. CHAIR (SIGN AND DATE): (TYPE OR PRINT Walt McPhail NAME): A-2 AGENCY NAME: South Carolina Forestry Commission AGENCY CODE: P120 SECTION: 043 AGENCY’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS The SC Forestry Commission was created in 1927 with its General Duties defined in State Code 48-23-90.
    [Show full text]
  • District of Columbia Statehood and Voting Representation
    Updated June 29, 2020 District of Columbia Statehood and Voting Representation On June 26, 2020, the U.S. House of Representatives have included full statehood or more limited methods of considered and passed the Washington, D.C. Admission providing DC residents the ability to vote in congressional Act, H.R. 51. This marked the first time in 27 years a elections. Some Members of Congress have opposed these District of Columbia (DC) statehood bill was considered on legislative efforts and recommended maintaining the status the floor of the House of Representatives, and the first time quo. Past legislative proposals have generally aligned with in the history of Congress a DC statehood bill was passed one of the following five options: by either the House or the Senate. 1. a constitutional amendment to give DC residents voting representation in This In Focus discusses the political status of DC, identifies Congress; concerns regarding DC representation, describes selected issues in the statehood process, and outlines some recent 2. retrocession of the District of Columbia DC statehood or voting representation bills. It does not to Maryland; provide legal or constitutional analysis on DC statehood or 3. semi-retrocession (i.e., allowing qualified voting representation. It does not address territorial DC residents to vote in Maryland in statehood issues. For information and analysis on these and federal elections for the Maryland other issues, please refer to the CRS products listed in the congressional delegation to the House and final section. Senate); 4. statehood for the District of Columbia; District of Columbia and When ratified in 1788, the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Order Blocking Removal from Federal Court Back to State Court
    Case 2:13-cv-05410-NJB-DEK Document 363 Filed 06/27/14 Page 1 of 83 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE CIVIL ACTION SOUTHEAST LOUISIANA FLOOD PROTECTION AUTHORITY – EAST VERSUS CASE NO. 13-5410 TENNESSEE GAS PIPELINE COMPANY, LLC et al SECTION: “G” (3) ORDER AND REASONS In this litigation, Plaintiff Board of Commissioners of the Southeast Louisiana Flood Protection Authority—East (“Plaintiff”) seeks damages and injunctive relief against ninety-two oil and gas companies whose actions have allegedly caused erosion of coastal lands, leaving south Louisiana increasingly exposed to tropical storms and hurricanes. Plaintiff originally filed suit in Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans, but Defendants removed the matter to this federal Court. Now pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s “Motion to Remand.”1 Having considered the motion, the memoranda in support, the memoranda in opposition, the statements at oral argument, Plaintiff’s petition, the notice of removal, and the applicable law, the Court will deny the motion. Because the Court’s specific basis for jurisdiction has the potential to reverberate throughout a number of other considerations in this litigation—particularly, Plaintiff’s entitlement, if any, to a jury trial, and choice of law questions—the Court has examined all five bases of jurisdiction raised in Defendants’ Notice of Removal. 1 Rec. Doc. 70. Case 2:13-cv-05410-NJB-DEK Document 363 Filed 06/27/14 Page 2 of 83 I. Background A. Factual Background Plaintiff in
    [Show full text]
  • Idaho Tribal-State Court Bench Book (2014)
    IDAHO TRIBAL-STATE COURT BENCH BOOK 2014 EDITION I. Purpose .................................................................................................................................................. 3 II. Tribal Courts and State Courts in Idaho ................................................................................................ 3 A. Tribal Courts Overview (Alphabetically) ........................................................................................... 3 The Coeur d’Alene Tribal Court ......................................................................................................... 3 The Kootenai Tribal Court ................................................................................................................. 4 The Nez Perce Tribal Court ............................................................................................................... 5 The Shoshone-Bannock Tribal Court ................................................................................................. 5 The Shoshone-Paiute Tribal Court .................................................................................................... 6 B. State Courts Overview ...................................................................................................................... 7 III. Civil Jurisdiction Involving Tribal Lands ................................................................................................ 8 A. Land Status of Tribal Nations in Idaho .............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    TABLEGUIDELINES OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 12: CONTACT INFORMATION AND MAPS 12.1 ADOT CONTACT INFORMATION……………………………………………….......122 12.2 BLM CONTACT INFORMATION…………………………………………………......123 12.3 USFS CONTACT INFORMATION………………………………………………….....124 12.4 FHWA CONTACT INFORMATION…………………………………………………....130 12.5 GIS INFORMATION..............................................................................................131 12.6 MAPS...................................................................................................................132 121 12.1 ADOT CONTACT INFORMATION ADOT web link azdot.gov/ ADOT maps azdot.gov/maps General Information 602-712-7355 OFFICE ADOT DIRECTOR 602.712.7227 Deputy Director of Transportation 602.712.7391 Deputy Director of Policy 602.712.7550 Deputy Director of Business Operations 602.712.7228 Multimodal Planning Division (MPD) Director 602.712.7431 MPD Planning and Programming Director 602.712.8140 MPD Planning and Environmental Linkages Manager 602.712.4574 Infrastructure Delivery and Operations Division (IDO) 602.712.7391 State Engineer, Sr. Deputy State Engineer and Deputy State Engineer Offices 602.712.7391 DISTRICT ENGINEERS Northcentral azdot.gov/business/district-contacts/northcentral 928.774.1491 Northeast azdot.gov/business/district-contacts/northeast 928.524.5400 Central Construction District azdot.gov/business/district-contacts/central 602.712.8965 Central Maintenance District azdot.gov/business/district-contacts/central 602.712.6664 Northwest azdot.gov/business/district-contacts/northwest 928.777.5861
    [Show full text]
  • “Catastrophic” Wildfire a New Ecological Paradigm of Forest Health by Chad Hanson, Ph.D
    John Muir Project Technical Report 1 • Winter 2010 • www.johnmuirproject.org The Myth of “Catastrophic” Wildfire A New Ecological Paradigm of Forest Health by Chad Hanson, Ph.D. Contents The Myth of “Catastrophic” Wildfire: A New Ecological Paradigm of Forest Health 1 Preface 1 Executive Summary 4 Myths and Facts 6 Myth/Fact 1: Forest fire and home protection 6 Myth/Fact 2: Ecological effects of high-intensity fire 7 Myth/Fact 3: Forest fire intensity 12 Myth/Fact 4: Forest regeneration after high-intensity fire 13 Myth/Fact 5: Forest fire extent 14 Myth/Fact 6: Climate change and fire activity 17 Myth/Fact 7: Dead trees and forest health 19 Myth/Fact 8: Particulate emissions from high-intensity fire 20 Myth/Fact 9: Forest fire and carbon sequestration 20 Myth/Fact 10: “Thinning” and carbon sequestration 22 Myth/Fact 11: Biomass extraction from forests 23 Summary: For Ecologically “Healthy Forests”, We Need More Fire and Dead Trees, Not Less. 24 References 26 Photo Credits 30 Recommended Citation 30 Contact 30 About the Author 30 The Myth of “Catastrophic” Wildfire A New Ecological Paradigm of Forest Health ii The Myth of “Catastrophic” Wildfire: A New Ecological Paradigm of Forest Health By Chad Hanson, Ph.D. Preface In the summer of 2002, I came across two loggers felling fire-killed trees in the Star fire area of the Eldorado National Forest in the Sierra Nevada. They had to briefly pause their activities in order to let my friends and I pass by on the narrow dirt road, and in the interim we began a conversation.
    [Show full text]
  • United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island
    Case 1:18-cv-00395-WES-LDA Document 87 Filed 09/14/18 Page 1 of 94 PageID #: 1186 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND STATE OF RHODE ISLAND, ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 18-cv-00395-WES-LDA ) CHEVRON CORP.; ) DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO CHEVRON USA, INC.; ) PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO EXXONMOBIL CORP.; ) REMAND TO STATE COURT BP, PLC; ) BP AMERICA, INC.; ) [Removal from the Providence BP PRODUCTS NORTH AMERICA, INC.; ) Superior Court of Rhode Island, C.A. ROYAL DUTCH SHELL, PLC; ) No. PC-2018-4716] MOTIVA ENTERPRISES, LLC; ) SHELL OIL PRODUCTS COMPANY, ) Action Filed: July 2, 2018 LLC; ) CITGO PETROLEUM CORP.; ) CONOCOPHILLIPS; ) CONOCOPHILLIPS COMPANY; ) PHILLIPS 66; ) MARATHON OIL COMPANY; ) MARATHON OIL CORPORATION; ) MARATHON PETROLEUM CORP.; ) MARATHON PETROLEUM COMPANY, ) LP; ) SPEEDWAY, LLC; ) HESS CORP.; ) LUKOIL PAN AMERICAS, LLC; ) GETTY PETROLEUM MARKETING, ) INC.; AND DOES 1 through 100, inclusive ) ) Defendants. ) ) Case 1:18-cv-00395-WES-LDA Document 87 Filed 09/14/18 Page 2 of 94 PageID #: 1187 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 II. LEGAL STANDARD ......................................................................................................... 6 III. ARGUMENT ...................................................................................................................... 9 A. Plaintiff’s Claims Arise, If at All, Under Federal Common Law ..........................................9
    [Show full text]
  • Comparing MODIS Net Primary Production Estimates with Terrestrial National Forest Inventory Data in Austria
    Remote Sens. 2015, 7, 3878-3906; doi:10.3390/rs70403878 OPEN ACCESS remote sensing ISSN 2072-4292 www.mdpi.com/journal/remotesensing Article Comparing MODIS Net Primary Production Estimates with Terrestrial National Forest Inventory Data in Austria Mathias Neumann 1,*, Maosheng Zhao 2, Georg Kindermann 3 and Hubert Hasenauer 1 1 Institute of Silviculture, Department of Forest and Soil Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Peter-Jordan-Str. 82, A-1190 Vienna, Austria; E-Mail: [email protected] 2 Department of Geographical Sciences, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA; E-Mail: [email protected] 3 Natural Hazards and Landscape, Department of Forest Growth and Silviculture, Federal Research and Training Centre for Forests, Vienna, Seckendorff-Gudent-Weg 8, A-1130 Vienna, Austria; E-Mail: [email protected] * Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: [email protected]; Tel.: +43-1-47654-4078; Fax: +43-1-47654-4092. Academic Editors: Randolph H. Wynne and Prasad S. Thenkabail Received: 11 December 2014 / Accepted: 17 March 2015 / Published: 1 April 2015 Abstract: The mission of this study is to compare Net Primary Productivity (NPP) estimates using (i) forest inventory data and (ii) spatio-temporally continuous MODIS (MODerate resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) remote sensing data for Austria. While forest inventories assess the change in forest growth based on repeated individual tree measurements (DBH, height etc.), the MODIS NPP estimates are based on ecophysiological processes such as photosynthesis, respiration and carbon allocation. We obtained repeated national forest inventory data from Austria, calculated a “ground-based” NPP estimate and compared the results with “space-based” MODIS NPP estimates using different daily climate data.
    [Show full text]