Sagavanirktok River Spring Breakup Observations 2015

Alaska’s economy is strongly tied to oil production, with most of the petroleum coming from the Prudhoe Bay oil fields. Deadhorse, the furthest north oil town on the Alaska North Slope, provides support to the oil industry. The Dalton Highway is the only road that connects Deadhorse with other cities in Interior Alaska. The road is heavily used to move supplies to and from the oil fields. In late March and early April 2015, the Dalton Highway near Deadhorse was affected by ice and winter overflow from the Sagavanirktok River, which caused the road’s closure two times, for a total of eleven days (four and seven days, respectively). In mid-May, the Sagavanirktok River at several reaches flooded the Dalton from approximately milepost (MP) 394 to 414 (Deadhorse). The magnitude of this event, the first recorded since the road was built in 1976, was such that the Dalton was closed for nearly three weeks. During that time, a water station and several pressure transducers were installed to track water level changes on the river. Discharge measurements were performed, and water samples were collected to estimate suspended sediment concentration. Water levels changed from approximately 1 m near MP414 to around 3 m at the East Bank station, located on the river’s east bank (about MP392). Discharge measurements ranged from nearly 400 to 1560 m3/s, with the maximum measurement roughly coinciding with the peak. Representative sediment sizes (D50) ranged from 10 to 14 microns. Suspended sediment concentrations ranged from a few mg/L (clear water in early flooding stages) to approximately 4500 mg/L. An analysis of cumulative runoff for two contiguous watersheds—the Putuligayuk and Kuparuk—indicates that 2014 was a record-breaking year in both watersheds. Additionally, an unseasonable spell of warm air temperatures was recorded during mid-February to early March. While specific conditions responsible for this unprecedented flood are difficult to pinpoint, runoff and the warm spell certainly contributed to the flood event.ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................................... i LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... iii LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................... v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND DISCLAIMER .......................................................................... vi CONVERSION FACTORS, UNITS, WATER QUALITY UNITS, VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL DATUM, ABBREVIATIONS, AND SYMBOLS ............................................ vii ABBREVIATIONS, ACRONYMS, AND SYMBOLS ................................................................ ix 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1 2 STUDY AREA ........................................................................................................................ 5 3 METHODOLOGY AND EQUIPMENT ................................................................................ 9 3.1 Ice Elevations Prior to Breakup (GPS Surveys)............................................................. 10 3.2 X-Band SAR Analysis ................................................................................................... 11 3.3 Water Levels .................................................................................................................. 12 3.4 Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler ................................................................................. 14 3.5 Discharge Measurements ............................................................................................... 15 3.6 Suspended Sediments ..................................................................................................... 17 4 RESULTS .............................................................................................................................. 18 4.1 Air Temperature ............................................................................................................. 18 4.2 Annual Precipitation ....................................................................................................... 20 4.3 Cold Season Precipitation .............................................................................................. 22 4.4 Warm Season Precipitation ............................................................................................ 23 4.5 Surface Water Hydrology............................................................................................... 27 4.5.1 Ice Elevations .......................................................................................................... 28 4.5.2 X-Band SAR Analysis ............................................................................................ 31 4.5.3 Water Levels ........................................................................................................... 37 4.5.4 Discharge Measurements ........................................................................................ 43 4.5.5 Additional Field Observations ................................................................................ 49 4.5.6 Cumulative Volumetric Warm Season Runoff ....................................................... 59 4.5.7 Suspended Sediment ............................................................................................... 63 5 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................... 66 6 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................... 68 7 APPENDICES ....................................................................................................................... 72 ii

Hydro-sedimentological Monitoring and Analysis for Material Sites on the Sagavanirktok River

Researchers from the Water and Environmental Research Center at the Institute of Northern Engineering, University of Alaska Fairbanks, are conducting a research project related to sediment transport conditions along the Sagavanirktok River. This report presents tasks conducted from summer 2015 to early winter 2016. Four hydrometeorological stations were installed in early July 2015 on the west bank of the river. The stations are spread out over a reach of approximately 90 miles along the Dalton Highway (from MP 405, the northernmost location, to MP 318, the southernmost location). These stations are equipped with pressure transducers and with air temperature, relative humidity, wind speed, wind direction, barometric pressure, and turbidity sensors. Cameras were installed at each station, and automatic water samplers were deployed during the open-water season. The stations have a telemetry system that allows for transmitting data in near-real time. Discharge measurements were performed three times: twice in July (early and late in the month), and once in mid-September. Measured discharges were in the order of 100 m3/s, indicating that measurements were performed during low flows. Suspended sediment concentrations ranged from 2 mg/l (nearly clear water) to 625 mg/l. The average grain size for suspended sediment from selected samples was 47.8 μm, which corresponds to silt. Vegetation was characterized at 27 plots near the stations. Measurements of basic water quality parameters, performed during winter, indicated no potential issues at the sampled locations. Dry and wet pits were excavated in the vicinity of each station. These trenches will be used to estimate average bedload sediment transport during spring breakup 2016. A change detection analysis of the period 1985–2007 along the area of interest revealed that during the present study period, the river was relatively stable.ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................................... i LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................ vii DISCLAIMER .............................................................................................................................. vii CONVERSION FACTORS, UNITS, WATER QUALITY UNITS, VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL DATUM, ABBREVIATIONS, AND SYMBOLS ........................................... viii ABBREVIATIONS, ACRONYMS, AND SYMBOLS ................................................................. x 1 INTRODUCTION AND STUDY AREA ............................................................................... 1 2 METHODOLOGY AND EQUIPMENT .............................................................................. 11 2.1 Pit Trenches .................................................................................................................... 12 2.2 Meteorology ................................................................................................................... 13 2.3 Water Level Measurements ............................................................................................ 13 2.4 Runoff............................................................................................................................. 14 2.5 Suspended Sediment ...................................................................................................... 15 2.6 Turbidity ......................................................................................................................... 15 2.7 Substrate and Floodplain Vegetation Survey ................................................................. 16 2.7.1 Site selection ........................................................................................................... 16 2.7.2 Quantifying substrate .............................................................................................. 16 2.7.3 Characterizing vegetation ....................................................................................... 17 3 RESULTS .............................................................................................................................. 19 3.1 Pit Trench Configuration ................................................................................................ 19 3.2 Meteorology ................................................................................................................... 27 3.3 Water Level Observations .............................................................................................. 27 3.4 Runoff............................................................................................................................. 31 3.4.1 Additional runoff observations ............................................................................... 31 3.5 Suspended Sediment ...................................................................................................... 32 3.6 Suspended Sediment Grain-Size Distribution ................................................................ 34 3.7 Turbidity ......................................................................................................................... 35 3.8 Water Quality ................................................................................................................. 37 4 ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................... 39 4.1 Substrate and Vegetation ................................................................................................ 39 4.1.1 Substrate .................................................................................................................. 39 iii 4.1.2 Vegetation ............................................................................................................... 40 4.2 River Channel Stability .................................................................................................. 42 5 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................... 56 6 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................... 58 7 APPENDICES ....................................................................................................................... 6

Value-based Nursing Education

Curriculum guidelines from the American Association of Colleges of Nursing ( [ AACN], 1998) espouse that baccalaureate programs facilitate the development of professional values. The five core nursing values include human dignity, integrity, autonomy, altruism, and social justice. Behaviors that reflect these values characterize the caring, professional nurse (AACN, 1998). Teaching attitudes and actions that facilitate caring is a curriculum challenge. Caring is a multi-dimensional nursing concept that can be actualized through purposeful teaching and student-centered learning of core nursing values. This scholarly paper presents an innovative and integrative approach to value-based education in the baccalaureate nursing program at South Dakota State University (SDSU)

Sagavanirktok River Spring Breakup Observations 2016

In 2015, spring breakup on the Sagavanirktok River near Deadhorse was characterized by high flows that destroyed extensive sections of the Dalton Highway, closing the road for nearly 3 weeks. This unprecedented flood also damaged infrastructure that supports the trans-Alaska pipeline, though the pipeline itself was not damaged. The Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (ADOT&PF) and the Alyeska Pipeline Service Company made emergency repairs to their respective infrastructure. In December 2015, aufeis accumulation was observed by ADOT&PF personnel. In January 2016, a research team with the University of Alaska Fairbanks began monitoring and researching the aufeis and local hydroclimatology. Project objectives included determining ice elevations, identifying possible water sources, establishing surface meteorological conditions prior to breakup, measuring hydrosedimentological conditions (discharge, water level, and suspended sediment concentration) during breakup, and reviewing historical imagery of the aufeis feature. Ice surface elevations were surveyed with Global Positioning System (GPS) techniques in late February and again in mid-April, and measureable volume changes were calculated. However, river ice thickness obtained from boreholes near Milepost 394 (MP394) in late February and mid-April revealed no significant changes. It appears that flood mitigation efforts by ADOT&PF in the area contributed to limited vertical growth in ice at the boreholes. End-of-winter snow surveys throughout the watershed indicate normal or below normal snow water equivalents (SWE 10 cm). An imagery analysis of the lower Sagavanirktok aufeis from late winter for the past 17 years shows the presence of ice historically at the MP393–MP396 area. Water levels and discharge were relatively low in 2016 compared with 2015. The mild breakup in 2016 seems to have been due to temperatures dropping below freezing after the flow began. Spring 2015 was characterized by warm temperatures throughout the basin during breakup, which produced the high flows that destroyed sections of the Dalton Highway. A comparison of water levels at the East Bank Station during 2015 and 2016 indicates that the 2015 maximum water level was approximately 1 m above the 2016 maximum water level. ii Maximum measured discharge in 2016 was approximately half of that measured in 2015 in the lower Sagavanirktok River. Representative suspended sediment sizes (D50) ranged from 20 to 50 microns (medium to coarse silt). An objective of this study was to determine the composition and possible sources of water in the aufeis at the lower Sagavanirktok River. During the winter months and prior to breakup in 2016, overflow water was collected, primarily near the location of the aufeis, but also at upriver locations. Simultaneously possible contributing water sources were sampled between January and July 2016, including snow, glacial meltwater, and river water. Geochemical analyses were performed on all samples. It was found that the overflow water which forms the lower Sagavanirktok aufeis is most similar (R2 = 0.997) to the water that forms the aufeis at the Sagavanirktok River headwaters (Ivishak River), thought to be fed by relatively consistent groundwater sources.ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................................... i LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ v LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... ix ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND DISCLAIMER ........................................................................... x CONVERSION FACTORS, UNITS, WATER QUALITY UNITS, VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL DATUM, ABBREVIATIONS, AND SYMBOLS ............................................. xi ABBREVIATIONS, ACRONYMS, AND SYMBOLS .............................................................. xiii 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1 2 STUDY AREA ........................................................................................................................ 6 3 METHODOLOGY AND EQUIPMENT ................................................................................ 6 3.1 Aufeis Extent .................................................................................................................... 7 3.1.1 Field Methods ........................................................................................................... 7 3.1.2 Structure from Motion Imagery ................................................................................ 8 3.1.3 Imagery ..................................................................................................................... 8 3.2 Surface Meteorology ...................................................................................................... 10 3.3 Water Levels .................................................................................................................. 11 3.4 Discharge Measurements ............................................................................................... 13 3.5 Suspended Sediment ...................................................................................................... 16 3.6 Water Chemistry ............................................................................................................ 17 3.6.1 Sampling ................................................................................................................. 17 3.6.2 Trace Element Analysis .......................................................................................... 19 3.6.3 Data Analysis .......................................................................................................... 19 4 RESULTS .............................................................................................................................. 20 4.1 Air Temperature ............................................................................................................. 20 4.2 Wind Speed and Direction ............................................................................................. 29 4.3 Annual Precipitation ....................................................................................................... 30 4.4 Cold Season Precipitation .............................................................................................. 32 4.5 Warm Season Precipitation ............................................................................................ 36 4.6 Aufeis Extent .................................................................................................................. 40 4.6.1 Historical Aufeis at Franklin Bluffs ........................................................................ 40 4.6.2 Delineating Ice Surface Elevation with GPS and Aerial Imagery .......................... 46 4.6.3 Ice Boreholes .......................................................................................................... 55 iv 4.6.4 Ice Accumulation (SR50) ....................................................................................... 58 4.6.5 Ice Thickness and Volume ...................................................................................... 60 4.7 Surface Water Hydrology............................................................................................... 62 4.7.1 Sagavanirktok River at MP318 (DSS4) .................................................................. 67 4.7.2 Sagavanirktok River at Happy Valley (DSS3) ....................................................... 70 4.7.3 Sagavanirktok River Below the Ivishak River (DSS2)........................................... 73 4.7.4 Sagavanirktok River at East Bank (DSS5) Near Franklin Bluffs ........................... 76 4.7.5 Sagavanirktok River at MP405 (DSS1) West Channel .......................................... 85 4.7.6 Additional Field Observations ................................................................................ 86 4.8 Suspended Sediment ...................................................................................................... 87 4.9 Water Chemistry ............................................................................................................ 91 5 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................... 96 6 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................... 99 7 APPENDICES ..................................................................................................................... 10

Hydrological, Sedimentological, and Meteorological Observations and Analysis on the Sagavanirktok River

The Dalton Highway near Deadhorse was closed twice during late March and early April 2015 because of extensive overflow from the Sagavanirktok River that flowed over the highway. That spring, researchers from the Water and Environmental Research Center at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) monitored the river conditions during breakup, which was characterized by unprecedented flooding that overtopped and consequently destroyed several sections of the Dalton Highway near Deadhorse. The UAF research team has monitored breakup conditions at the Sagavanirktok River since that time. Given the magnitude of the 2015 flooding, the Alyeska Pipeline Service Company started a long-term monitoring program within the river basin. In addition, the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (ADOT&PF) funded a multiyear project related to sediment transport conditions along the Sagavanirktok River. The general objectives of these projects include determining ice elevations, identifying possible water sources, establishing surface hydro-meteorological conditions prior to breakup, measuring hydro-sedimentological conditions during breakup and summer, and reviewing historical imagery of the aufeis extent. In the present report, we focus on new data and analyze it in the context of previous data. We calculated and compared ice thickness near Franklin Bluffs for 2015, 2016, and 2017, and found that, in general, ice thickness during both 2015 and 2016 was greater than in 2017 across most of the study area. Results from a stable isotope analysis indicate that winter overflow, which forms the aufeis in the river area near Franklin Bluffs, has similar isotopic characteristics to water flowing from mountain springs. End-of-winter snow surveys (in 2016/2017) within the watershed indicate that the average snow water equivalent was similar to what we observed in winter 2015/2016. Air temperatures in May 2017 were low on the Alaska North Slope, which caused a long and gradual breakup, with peak flows occurring in early June, compared with mid-May in both 2015 and 2016. Maximum discharge measured at the East Bank station, near Franklin Bluffs was 750 m3/s (26,485 ft3/s) on May 30, 2017, while the maximum measured flow was 1560 m3/s (55,090 ft3/s) at the same station on May 20, 2015. Available cumulative rainfall data indicate that 2016 was wetter than 2017. ii In September 2015, seven dry and wet pits were dug near the hydro-sedimentological monitoring stations along the Sagavanirktok River study reach. The average grain-size of the sediment of exposed gravel bars at sites located upstream of the Ivishak-Sagavanirktok confluence show relatively constant values. Grain size becomes finer downstream of the confluence. We conducted monthly topo-bathymetric surveys during the summer months of 2016 and 2017 in each pit. Sediment deposition and erosion was observed in each of the pits. Calculated sedimentation volumes in each pit show the influence of the Ivishak River in the bed sedimenttransport capacity of the Sagavanirktok River. In addition, comparison between dry and wet pit sedimentation volumes in some of the stations proves the complexity of a braided river, which is characterized by frequent channel shifting A two-dimensional hydraulic model is being implemented for a material site. The model will be used to estimate the required sediment refill time based on different river conditions.ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................................... i LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................................... i LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................... xiv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND DISCLAIMER ........................................................................ xvi CONVERSION FACTORS, UNITS, WATER QUALITY UNITS, VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL DATUM, ABBREVIATIONS, AND SYMBOLS .......................................... xvii ABBREVIATIONS, ACRONYMS, AND SYMBOLS .............................................................. xix 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1 2 STUDY AREA ........................................................................................................................ 2 2.1 Sagavanirktok River near MP318 Site 066 (DSS4) ......................................................... 7 2.2 Sagavanirktok River at Happy Valley Site 005 (DSS3) .................................................. 7 2.3 Sagavanirktok River below the Confluence with the Ivishak River (DSS2) ................... 9 2.4 Sagavanirktok River near MP405 Site 042 (DSS1) ....................................................... 10 3 METHODOLOGY AND EQUIPMENT .............................................................................. 13 3.1 Pits .................................................................................................................................. 13 3.1.1 Excavation............................................................................................................... 13 3.1.2 Surveying ................................................................................................................ 14 3.2 Surface Meteorology ...................................................................................................... 15 3.3 Aufeis Extent .................................................................................................................. 17 3.3.1 Field Methods ......................................................................................................... 18 3.3.2 Imagery ................................................................................................................... 18 3.4 Water Level Measurements ............................................................................................ 19 3.5 Runoff............................................................................................................................. 20 3.6 Suspended Sediment ...................................................................................................... 21 3.7 Turbidity ......................................................................................................................... 22 3.8 Stable Isotopes................................................................................................................ 22 4 RESULTS .............................................................................................................................. 23 4.1 Meteorology ................................................................................................................... 23 4.1.1 Air Temperature ...................................................................................................... 23 4.1.2 Precipitation ............................................................................................................ 31 4.1.2.1 Cold Season Precipitation ................................................................................ 31 4.1.2.2 Warm Season Precipitation ............................................................................. 36 4.1.3 Wind Speed and Direction ...................................................................................... 39 iv 4.2 Aufeis Extent .................................................................................................................. 40 4.2.1 Historical Aufeis at Franklin Bluffs ........................................................................ 41 4.2.2 Delineating Ice Surface Elevation with GPS and Aerial Imagery .......................... 45 4.3 Surface Water Hydrology ............................................................................................... 52 4.3.1 Sagavanirktok River at MP318 (DSS4) .................................................................. 58 4.3.2 Sagavanirktok River at Happy Valley (DSS3) ....................................................... 61 4.3.3 Sagavanirktok River near MP347 (ASS1) .............................................................. 65 4.3.4 Sagavanirktok River below the Ivishak River (DSS2) ........................................... 66 4.3.5 Sagavanirktok River at East Bank (DSS5) near Franklin Bluffs ............................ 70 4.3.6 Sagavanirktok River at MP405 (DSS1) West Channel .......................................... 78 4.3.7 Additional Field Observations ................................................................................ 82 4.3.8 Preliminary Rating Curves and Estimated Discharge ............................................. 85 4.4 Stable Isotopes................................................................................................................ 86 4.5 Sediment Grain Size Distribution .................................................................................. 90 4.5.1 Streambed Sediment Grain Size Distribution ......................................................... 90 4.5.2 Suspended Sediment Grain Size Distribution ......................................................... 94 4.6 Suspended Sediment Concentration ............................................................................... 95 4.6.1 Sagavanirktok River near MP318 (DSS4) .............................................................. 95 4.6.2 Sagavanirktok River at Happy Valley (DSS3) ..................................................... 100 4.6.3 Sagavanirktok River below the Ivishak River (DSS2) ......................................... 105 4.6.4 Sagavanirktok River near MP405 (DSS1) ............................................................ 111 4.6.5 Discussion ............................................................................................................. 114 4.7 Turbidity ....................................................................................................................... 116 4.7.1 Sagavanirktok River near MP318 (DSS4) ............................................................ 116 4.7.2 Sagavanirktok River at Happy Valley (DSS3) ..................................................... 119 4.7.3 Sagavanirktok River below the Ivishak (DSS2) ................................................... 124 4.7.4 Sagavanirktok River near MP405 (DSS1) ............................................................ 126 4.7.5 Discussion ............................................................................................................. 130 4.8 Analysis of Pits............................................................................................................. 130 4.8.1 Photographs of Pits ............................................................................................... 130 4.8.2 GIS Analysis of Pit Bathymetry ........................................................................... 141 4.8.3 Pit Sedimentation .................................................................................................. 142 4.8.4 Erosion Surveys .................................................................................................... 149 4.8.5 Patterns of Sediment Transport Along the River .................................................. 156 v 4.9 Hydraulic Modeling ..................................................................................................... 158 4.9.1 Model Development .............................................................................................. 160 4.9.2 Results of Simulation ............................................................................................ 165 5 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................. 171 6 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... 174 7 APPENDICES ..................................................................................................................... 18

Correlating corneal arcus with atherosclerosis in familial hypercholesterolemia

Abstract Background A relationship between corneal arcus and atherosclerosis has long been suspected but is controversial. The homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia patients in this study present a unique opportunity to assess this issue. They have both advanced atherosclerosis and corneal arcus. Methods This is a cross-sectional study of 17 patients homozygous for familial hypercholesterolemia presenting to the Clinical Center of the National Institutes of Health. Plasma lipoproteins, circumferential extent of arcus, thoracic aorta and coronary calcific atherosclerosis score, and Achilles tendon width were measured at the National Institutes of Health. Results Patients with corneal arcus had higher scores for calcific atherosclerosis (mean 2865 compared to 412), cholesterol-year score (mean 11830 mg-yr/dl compared to 5707 mg-yr/dl), and Achilles tendon width (mean 2.54 cm compared to 1.41 cm) than those without. Corneal arcus and Achilles tendon width were strongly correlated and predictive of each other. Although corneal arcus was correlated with calcific atherosclerosis (r = 0.67; p = 0.004), it was not as highly correlated as was the Achilles tendon width (r = 0.855; p Conclusion Corneal arcus reflects widespread tissue lipid deposition and is correlated with both calcific atherosclerosis and xanthomatosis in these patients. Patients with more severe arcus tend to have more severe calcific atherosclerosis. Corneal arcus is not as good an indicator of calcific atherosclerosis as Achilles tendon thickness, but its presence suggests increased atherosclerosis in these hypercholesterolemic patients.</p

Validation of a 40-Gene Expression Profile Test to Predict Metastatic Risk in Localized High-Risk Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Background: Current staging systems for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) have limited positive predictive value (PPV) for identifying patients who will experience metastasis. Objective: To develop and validate a gene expression profile (GEP) test for predicting risk for metastasis in localized, high-risk cSCC with the goal of improving risk-directed patient management. Methods: Archival formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded primary cSCC tissue and clinicopathologic data (n=586) were collected from 23 independent centers in a prospectively designed study. A GEP signature was developed using a discovery cohort (n=202) and validated in a separate, non-overlaping, independent cohort (n=324). Results: A prognostic, 40-gene expression profile (40-GEP) test was developed and validated, stratifying high-risk cSCC patients into classes based on metastasis risk: Class 1 (low-risk), Class 2A (high-risk), and Class 2B (highest-risk). For the validation cohort, 3-year metastasis-free survival (MFS) rates were 91.4%, 80.6%, and 44.0%, respectively. A PPV of 60% was achieved for the highest-risk group (Class 2B), an improvement over staging systems; while negative predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity were comparable to staging systems. Limitations: Potential understaging of cases could affect metastasis rate accuracy.Conclusion: The 40-GEP test is an independent predictor of metastatic risk that can complement current staging systems for patients with high-risk cSCC

The Role Farm Broadcasters Play in the Profitability of Radio Stations in South Dakota

A commercial radio station is a profit oriented business. A typical radio station in the 1980\u27s can expect to earn approximately a 9.5% profit (Broadcasting, 1984). This compares with an average station profit of 33% in 1944 (Sterling, 1984). And, because a radio station is a business, radio managers and owners closely monitor the advertising support and listenership of their station. Radio formats, programs and personalities that are not accepted by the listening audience and by advertisers are not profitable. Because it is more difficult for a radio station to earn a profit today than it was 40 years ago, radio managers and owners must work harder to plan how their station can have high numbers of listeners, and solid advertising revenue. When radio managers and owners consider devoting a portion of the broadcast day to farm programming, they must also consider whether being a farm station will define their audience so narrowly that some listeners and advertisers go to other stations, or whether the farm programs will attract a special audience and more advertisers. One advantage farm stations have over non-farm stations is the ability to attract national farm advertising accounts. Further, farm radio stations affiliated with the National Association of Farm Broadcasters possibly earn a greater portion of their revenue from national farm advertisers. A major question confronting managers and owners in South Dakota is choosing the appropriate format and audience. If a station is to identify with the farm market, one of the most visible ways is to have a farm broadcaster and affiliate with the National Association of Farm Broadcasters. This affiliation then becomes a means for national ag advertisers to identify the station as one that serves the audience they want to reach. The effect of this identity on the well being of the station is important to the financial success of the station, and consequently to broadcasting in a rural state. The purpose of this study was to determine the role of farm broadcasters in South Dakota radio stations, as perceived by radio station general managers