Geology topics

Karen E. Jenni

Publications and source records attributed to Karen E. Jenni.

9 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2022

Use case development for earth monitoring, analysis, and prediction (EarthMAP)—A road map for future integrated predictive science at the U.S. Geological Survey

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 21st-century science strategy 2020–30 promotes a bureau-wide strategy to develop and deliver an integrated, predictive science capability that works at the scales and timelines needed to inform societally relevant resource management and protection and public safety and environmental health decisions (U.S. Geological Survey, 2021). This is the overarching goal of the USGS Earth Monitoring, Analysis, and Prediction (EarthMAP) vision, which consists of three components: (1) integrated data and information, (2) integrated predictive science, and (3) actionable information—all designed and delivered to respond to user needs. To launch this vision and help shape the design and implementation of integrated predictive science, the USGS Regional Offices each developed a set of use cases (hereafter Use Cases)—short descriptions of potential science applications that could clearly address high priority decision-making needs of our stakeholders and that align with an integrated science focus. Use Cases are not actionable science planning documents, nor stand-alone scholarly works, but should be considered as innovative, next-generation science ideas that can be considered as potential components of science plans still under development. The goal of Use Case development was to (1) identify and characterize existing USGS scientific capacities and expertise that can support science goals and products, (2) identify opportunities to leverage current capacities for next-generation science, and (3) foster engagement across the entire Bureau to further refine the USGS strategy for EarthMAP and integrated predictive science. The Use Case development effort documented in this report was coordinated by the Use Case Development Team (UCDT), consisting of representatives from each region. The UCDT undertook five tasks: (1) develop a unified approach to engage bureau scientists consistently across all regions in aspirational thinking about what can be accomplished; (2) work with the regions and their Science Centers to generate an initial set of Use Cases, authored directly by scientists; (3) characterize, summarize, and document the initial set of Use Case submissions from authors to illuminate bureau-level demand for integrated science; (4) compare existing and needed capacities from the Use Case descriptions with preliminary results of the EarthMAP Capacity Assessment (Keisman and others, 2021); and (5) describe lessons learned from the Use Case development process and provide recommendations to inform future efforts to generate integrated science activities. This report outlines the approach the UCDT developed to solicit Use Cases from the regions and summarizes the high-level qualitative findings from this first-round effort. The UCDT received 36 Use Cases from the regions and identified potential points of convergence and commonalities considered useful in making connections among the participating scientists. The Southwest (SW) Region and the Rocky Mountain (RM) Region asked scientists to give special consideration to Use Cases with applicability to the Colorado River Basin, and seven of the Use Cases specifically named that geographic area as a focus. Coastal hazards and coastal resilience were identified in Use Cases from the Alaska (AK), Northeast (NE), and Southeast (SE) Regions. Aspects of wildfire and post-wildfire response were part of Uses Cases from AK, RM, and SW Regions. The greatest convergence of Use Case themes was related to conservation of public lands and waters, which is a powerful linkage lending strength to future collaborative efforts. The most common type of stakeholder decisions that would be informed by the Use Case science applications were related to adaptation, mitigation, and response (for example, how to increase the resilience of coastal communities to climate-related stressors and how to prevent or respond to harmful algal blooms). Other common types of decisions included water and land management decisions (including operational water management decisions such as reservoir operations and land use planning in the sagebrush biome), decisions about how to manage and conserve habitats and species, and risk management decisions (such as managing the post-wildfire flood risks). These decision types are not exclusive because many Use Cases cross categories. Use Case authors identified existing and needed science and technology capabilities required for Use Case implementation, which were then aligned to capabilities assessed in the EarthMAP Capacity Assessment (Keisman and others, 2021). Strong alignment was found for data and information integration approaches, modeling and prediction approaches, and capabilities related to delivery of actionable information. A majority of Use Cases indicated insufficient current capacity for needed data collection methods, data integration, and modeling and prediction approaches, whereas only 25 percent indicated insufficient capacity for actionable information delivery. Overall, many Use Case capacity demand gaps could potentially be met by existing bureau-wide capacity. In addition, nearly half of the Use Cases could potentially be implemented within 3 years if funding, capabilities, and personnel impediments were removed and science priorities were realigned. Several challenges emerged during the Use Case development process. The first challenge was developing an approach that was flexible enough to accommodate regional differences in planning and implementation, while also ensuring enough guidance to promote meaningful summary analyses. The UCDT encountered a strong demand for continuous communication and education to improve overall understanding of the integrated predictive science strategy. Another challenge was managing expectations about EarthMAP activities as a design effort that was not aligned to an immediate funding opportunity. Connecting the Use Cases to stakeholder needs without the opportunity for direct stakeholder engagement was also challenging. The last notable challenge was in obtaining consistent interpretation and characterization of the qualitative data housed in the narrative descriptions of Use Cases, written in different styles. Overall, the 36 Use Cases can serve as components of a road map for advancing integrated monitoring and predictive science throughout the USGS by revealing opportunities to (1) encourage cross-region initiatives that address shared interests in common themes by integrating similar Use Cases and through direct involvement of stakeholders in identifying needs and designing effective responses, (2) leverage the Use Cases to target investments that are aligned with the Bureau and Department of the Interior (DOI) priorities, (3) connect Use Cases and the results of the companion EarthMAP Capacity Assessment (Keisman and others, 2021) to identify potential priorities for capacity building investments, and (4) raise awareness of common integrated and interdisciplinary science interests within and across the regions through Use Case and Capacity Assessment summary outreach activities.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2021

U.S. Geological Survey landscape science strategy 2020–2030

Across our Nation, multiple Federal, State, Tribal, and local governments are working with stakeholders and landowners to restore, conserve, and manage lands and resources to benefit fish, wildlife, and people. One of the largest Federal efforts is led by the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), with multiple DOI agencies working to conserve and manage public lands, resources, and cultural heritage for the benefit and enjoyment of current and future generations. As a science provider within the DOI, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has an important role in developing actionable science products that can inform decision making on public lands and across all of our Nation’s landscapes. Our landscapes and resources are undergoing continual change from a complex and interacting suite of stressors that include traditional and nontraditional land uses, a changing climate, a dynamic economy, and a culturally diverse and ever-changing society. Landscape science seeks to understand how the physical, biological, and social components of ecosystems and landscapes interact with each other and are affected by these stressors across local to global scales. The USGS has developed this landscape science strategy to focus and strengthen the agency’s efforts to inform critical conservation, restoration, and management decisions for American landscapes. The strategy directly supports the overarching 21st-century science strategy of the USGS and expands our perspective and focus on partnerships, including with internal, external, traditional, and nontraditional partners. The vision for USGS landscape science is to integrate multiple disciplines and approaches to create and deliver relevant, timely, and scientifically sound products that enable our partners to make informed decisions about how to manage complex interacting natural and human systems across changing American landscapes. This strategy seeks to leverage the expertise, data, analytical capacity, and tools of the agency and to strengthen integration of science efforts across programs and scales. A cornerstone of the strategy is working closely with landowners and resource managers to identify the science that is needed to inform management actions, and then working collaboratively with those same partners to coproduce science and data products that are timely, practical, and useful for their decision making. Many individual efforts within the USGS already embrace landscape science ideas and practices. With the development of this strategy, we are seeking to build on these efforts and to focus agency attention and expertise on expanding, connecting, and institutionalizing core practices and approaches for landscape science that produces actionable science products and tools that decision makers can use to help conserve and manage American landscapes.

Circular↗

USGS2020

Assessment of water and proppant quantities associated with petroleum production from the Eagle Ford Group, Gulf Coast, Texas, 2019

Building on a geology-based assessment of undiscovered, technically recoverable petroleum resources in the Eagle Ford Group in south Texas, the U.S. Geological Survey has estimated the required water and proppant demands and formation water production volumes associated with possible future development of these petroleum resources. The results of the water and proppant assessment are presented here, along with related drilling information and relevant water budget volumes for the region.

Texas↗

USGS2018

Multi-Resource Analysis—Methodology and synthesis

This document introduces the Multi-Resource Analysis (MRA), a set of products that are being designed to integrate information on multiple natural resources in a region, combine that information with models of resource interrelationships and scenarios of change, and provide meaningful insights on the implications of those changes to people and the resources they value. The MRA builds from and enhances a wide range of existing U.S. Geological Survey assessment products. These enhancements will help natural resource managers better understand the connections among the resources they manage and the changes that might occur due to natural events and human decisions. This knowledge will help them identify solutions to landscape-scale management issues that best meet their objectives. MRA products are developed through a structured process that brings together scientists, decision makers, and other stakeholders to address relevant issues and decisions for a specified geographic region, ensuring that the analysis is directly relevant. This circular introduces the MRA, describes the envisioned process for developing a region-specific MRA, and discusses the various MRA components and products. The MRA process and products are shown through descriptions and examples drawn from two proof-of-concept studies and related work.

Circular↗

USGS2017

Conceptual modeling framework to support development of site-specific selenium criteria for Lake Koocanusa, Montana, U.S.A., and British Columbia, Canada

The U.S. Geological Survey, working with the Montana Department of Environmental Quality and the British Columbia Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change Strategy, has developed a conceptual modeling framework that can be used to provide structured and scientifically based input to the Lake Koocanusa Monitoring and Research Working Group as they consider potential site-specific selenium criteria for Lake Koocanusa, a transboundary reservoir located in Montana and British Columbia. This report describes that modeling framework, provides an example of how it can be applied, and outlines possible next steps for implementing the framework.

British Columbia, Montana↗

USGS2017

Grand challenges for integrated USGS science — A workshop report

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has a long history of advancing the traditional Earth science disciplines and identifying opportunities to integrate USGS science across disciplines to address complex societal problems. The USGS science strategy for 2007–2017 laid out key challenges in disciplinary and interdisciplinary arenas, culminating in a call for increased focus on a number of crosscutting science directions. Ten years on, to further the goal of integrated science and at the request of the Executive Leadership Team (ELT), a workshop with three dozen invited scientists spanning different disciplines and career stages in the Bureau convened on February 7–10, 2017, at the USGS John Wesley Powell Center for Analysis and Synthesis in Fort Collins, Colorado. The workshop focused on identifying “grand challenges” for integrated USGS science. Individual participants identified nearly 70 potential grand challenges before the workshop and through workshop discussions. After discussion, four overarching grand challenges emerged: Natural resource security, Societal risk from existing and emerging threats, Smart infrastructure development, and Anticipatory science for changing landscapes. Participants also identified a “comprehensive science challenge” that highlights the development of integrative science, data, models, and tools—all interacting in a modular framework—that can be used to address these and other future grand challenges: Earth Monitoring, Analyses, and Projections (EarthMAP) EarthMAP is our long-term vision for an integrated scientific framework that spans traditional scientific boundaries and disciplines, and integrates the full portfolio of USGS science: research, monitoring, assessment, analysis, and information delivery. The Department of Interior, and the Nation in general, have a vast array of information needs. The USGS meets these needs by having a broadly trained and agile scientific workforce. Encouraging and supporting cross-discipline engagement would position the USGS to tackle complex and multifaceted scientific and societal challenges in the 21st Century.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2014

Decision analysis of mitigation and remediation of sedimentation within large wetland systems: a case study using Agassiz National Wildlife Refuge

Sedimentation has been identified as an important stressor across a range of wetland systems. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has the responsibility of maintaining wetlands within its National Wildlife Refuge System for use by migratory waterbirds and other wildlife. Many of these wetlands could be negatively affected by accelerated rates of sedimentation, especially those located in agricultural parts of the landscape. In this report we document the results of a decision analysis project designed to help U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service staff at the Agassiz National Wildlife Refuge (herein referred to as the Refuge) determine a strategy for managing and mitigating the negative effects of sediment loading within Refuge wetlands. The Refuge’s largest wetland, Agassiz Pool, has accumulated so much sediment that it has become dominated by hybrid cattail ( Typha × glauca ), and the ability of the staff to control water levels in the Agassiz Pool has been substantially reduced. This project consisted of a workshop with Refuge staff, local and regional stakeholders, and several technical and scientific experts. At the workshop we established Refuge management and stakeholder objectives, a range of possible management strategies, and assessed the consequences of those strategies. After deliberating a range of actions, the staff chose to consider the following three strategies: (1) an inexpensive strategy, which largely focused on using outreach to reduce external sediment inputs to the Refuge; (2) the most expensive option, which built on the first option and relied on additional infrastructure changes to the Refuge to increase management capacity; and (3) a strategy that was less expensive than strategy 2 and relied mostly on existing infrastructure to improve management capacity. Despite the fact that our assessments were qualitative, Refuge staff decided they had enough information to select the third strategy. Following our qualitative assessment, we discussed additional considerations and uncertainties that might affect implementation of this strategy.

Minnesota↗

USGS2014

Brine contamination to aquatic resources from oil and gas development in the Williston Basin, United States

The Williston Basin, which includes parts of Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota in the United States and the provinces of Manitoba and Saskatchewan in Canada, has been a leading domestic oil and gas producing region for more than one-half a century. Currently, there are renewed efforts to develop oil and gas resources from deep geologic formations, spurred by advances in recovery technologies and economic incentives associated with the price of oil. Domestic oil and gas production has many economic benefits and provides a means for the United States to fulfill a part of domestic energy demands; however, environmental hazards can be associated with this type of energy production in the Williston Basin, particularly to aquatic resources (surface water and shallow groundwater) by extremely saline water, or brine, which is produced with oil and gas. The primary source of concern is the migration of brine from buried reserve pits that were used to store produced water during recovery operations; however, there also are considerable risks of brine release from pipeline failures, poor infrastructure construction, and flow-back water from hydraulic fracturing associated with modern oilfield operations. During 2008, a multidisciplinary (biology, geology, water) team of U.S. Geological Survey researchers was assembled to investigate potential energy production effects in the Williston Basin. Researchers from the U.S. Geological Survey participated in field tours and met with representatives from county, State, tribal, and Federal agencies to identify information needs and focus research objectives. Common questions from agency personnel, especially those from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, were “are the brine plumes (plumes of brine-contaminated groundwater) from abandoned oil wells affecting wetlands on Waterfowl Production Areas and National Wildlife Refuges?” and “are newer wells related to Bakken and Three Forks development different than the older, abandoned wells (in terms of potential for affecting aquatic resources)?” Of special concern were the wetland habitats of the ecologically important Prairie Pothole Region, which overlays a part of the Williston Basin and is recognized for the production of a majority of North America’s migratory waterfowl. On the basis of the concerns raised by on-the-ground land managers, as well as findings from previous research, a comprehensive study was developed with the following goals: summarize existing information pertaining to oil and gas production and aquatic resources in the Williston Basin; assess brine plume migration from new and previously studied sites in the Prairie Pothole Region; perform a regional, spatial evaluation of oil and gas production activities and aquatic resources; assess the potential for brine contamination to wetlands and streams; and hold a decision analysis workshop with key stakeholders to discuss issues pertaining to oil and gas production and environmental effects and to identify information gaps and research needs. This report represents an initial, multidisciplinary evaluation of measured and potential environmental effects associated with oil and gas production in the Williston Basin and Prairie Pothole Region. Throughout this report there are reviews of current knowledge, and discussions relating to data gaps and research needs. On the basis of the information presented, future research needs include: regional geophysical and water-quality assessments to establish baselines for current conditions and estimate the extent of previous brine contamination, investigations into the direct effects of brine to biotic communities, and evaluations to identify the most effective techniques to mitigate brine contamination.

Montana, North Dakota↗

USGS2010

Decision analysis framing study: In-valley drainage management strategies for the western San Joaquin Valley, California

Constraints on drainage management in the western San Joaquin Valley and implications of proposed approaches to management were recently evaluated by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). The USGS found that a significant amount of data for relevant technical issues was available and that a structured, analytical decision support tool could help optimize combinations of specific in-valley drainage management strategies, address uncertainties, and document underlying data analysis for future use. To follow-up on USGS's technical analysis and to help define a scientific basis for decisionmaking in implementing in-valley drainage management strategies, this report describes the first step (that is, a framing study) in a Decision Analysis process. In general, a Decision Analysis process includes four steps: (1) problem framing to establish the scope of the decision problem(s) and a set of fundamental objectives to evaluate potential solutions, (2) generation of strategies to address identified decision problem(s), (3) identification of uncertainties and their relationships, and (4) construction of a decision support model. Participation in such a systematic approach can help to promote consensus and to build a record of qualified supporting data for planning and implementation. In December 2008, a Decision Analysis framing study was initiated with a series of meetings designed to obtain preliminary input from key stakeholder groups on the scope of decisions relevant to drainage management that were of interest to them, and on the fundamental objectives each group considered relevant to those decisions. Two key findings of this framing study are: (1) participating stakeholders have many drainage management objectives in common; and (2) understanding the links between drainage management and water management is necessary both for sound science-based decisionmaking and for resolving stakeholder differences about the value of proposed drainage management solutions. Citing ongoing legal processes associated with drainage management in the western San Joaquin Valley, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) withdrew from the Decision Analysis process early in the proceedings. Without the involvement of the USBR, the USGS discontinued further development of this study.

California↗