Geology topics

Paul Griffin

Publications and source records attributed to Paul Griffin.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2025

Climate change impacts on plant communities in the sagebrush region—A science synthesis to inform Bureau of Land Management resource management

This report synthesizes current (2024) science-based knowledge related to the impacts of climate change on big sagebrush vegetation in Western North America. This effort was conducted through the U.S. Geological Survey working with the Bureau of Land Management as part of multiple science syntheses to aid management agencies developing environmental impacts assessments in response to human-related or caused events. This report reviews the potential impacts climate change may have on sagebrush vegetation and related management decisions. The body of the synthesis introduces the diverse impacts of climate change across the region by first focusing directly on what climate change may entail in terms of altered temperature and precipitation patterns. The report then discusses how these changes could likely affect individual plant species based on experimental results and scale the impacts to species distributions and community composition. The synthesis section ends by surveying efforts to model potential future changes in habitat. The report goes on to link the synthesis conclusions to individual land uses or land management decisions, such as forage resources, restoration or fuel treatment. Finally, the report provides a section that discusses the pros and cons of available datasets that model the potential future of vegetation in the sagebrush region.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nev↗

USGS2017

Science framework for conservation and restoration of the sagebrush biome: Linking the Department of the Interior’s Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy to long-term strategic conservation actions, Part 1. Science basis and applications

The Science Framework is intended to link the Department of the Interior’s Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy with long-term strategic conservation actions in the sagebrush biome. The Science Framework provides a multiscale approach for prioritizing areas for management and determining effective management strategies within the sagebrush biome. The emphasis is on sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) ecosystems and Greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus). The approach provided in the Science Framework links sagebrush ecosystem resilience to disturbance and resistance to nonnative, invasive plant species to species habitat information based on the distribution and abundance of focal species. A geospatial process is presented that overlays information on ecosystem resilience and resistance, species habitats, and predominant threats and that can be used at the mid-scale to prioritize areas for management. A resilience and resistance habitat matrix is provided that can help decisionmakers evaluate risks and determine appropriate management strategies. Prioritized areas and management strategies can be refined by managers and stakeholders at the local scale based on higher resolution data and local knowledge. Decision tools are discussed for determining appropriate management actions for areas that are prioritized for management. Geospatial data, maps, and models are provided through the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) ScienceBase and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Landscape Approach Data Portal. The Science Framework is intended to be adaptive and will be updated as additional data become available on other values and species at risk. It is anticipated that the Science Framework will be widely used to: (1) inform emerging strategies to conserve sagebrush ecosystems, sagebrush dependent species, and human uses of the sagebrush system, and (2) assist managers in prioritizing and planning on-the-ground restoration and mitigation actions across the sagebrush biome.

California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oreg↗

USGS2012

Lewis and Clark National Historical Park Elk Monitoring Program Annual Report 2010

Fiscal year 2010 was the second full year of elk monitoring protocol implementation at Lewis and Clark National Historical Park (LEWI), part of the North Coast and Cascades Network (NCCN) Inventory and Monitoring program. Elk monitoring at Lewis and Clark NHP includes two components. Fecal pellet surveys at a systematic sample of points in the Fort Clatsop unit are intended to give quantitative estimates of relative use by elk in that unit. Driving surveys on specified routes in and near the Fort Clatsop unit are intended to provide an index of elk viewing opportunities on those roads. Fecal pellet surveys include a fall clearing session and a late winter sampling session. Fall clearing from November 9 to November 17, 2009 included visits to 67 survey points. Late winter sampling from March 1 to March 8 2010 included repeat visits to 65 of those same points, but not to two others that had hazardous access or were under water. We detected elk fecal pellets in 30 points in the fall and at 30 points in the late winter. Three to four road surveys per month were conducted in each of the 12 months of fiscal year 2010 (i.e., October-December 2009 and January-September 2010). Data from those surveys will be entered, validated, certified, and analyzed following the acceptance of the peer-reviewed protocol and associated database. Data from FY09, FY10, and FY11 will be useful in the formal analyses of trend. Those three years of data will contribute to the preparation of a four-year analysis and report after only one more year. Quantitative estimates of relative use by elk throughout the Fort Clatsop unit will be provided in the four-year report in 2012. Those estimates will account for detection bias, which comes from an incomplete count of elk pellets that were present in the subplots at the time of survey.

Oregon↗

USGS2010

Mount Rainier National Park and Olympic National Park Elk Monitoring Program Annual Report 2010

Fiscal year 2010 was the third year of gathering data needed for protocol development while simultaneously implementing what is expected to be the elk monitoring protocol at Mount Rainier (MORA) and Olympic (OLYM) national parks in the North Coast and Cascades Network (NCCN). Elk monitoring in these large wilderness parks relies on aerial surveys from a helicopter. Summer surveys are planned for both parks and are intended to provide quantitative estimates of abundance, sex and age composition, and distribution of migratory elk in high elevation trend count areas. Spring surveys are planned at Olympic National Park and are intended to provide quantitative estimates of abundance of resident and migratory elk on low-elevation winter ranges within surveyed trend count areas. An unknown number of elk is not detected during surveys. The protocol under development aims to estimate the number of missed elk by applying a model that accounts for detection bias. Detection bias in elk surveys in MORA will be estimated using a double-observer sightability model that was developed based on data from surveys conducted in 2008-2010. The model was developed using elk that were previously equipped with radio collars by cooperating tribes. That model is currently in peer review. At the onset of protocol development in OLYM there were no existing radio- collars on elk. Consequently double-observer sightability models have not yet been developed for elk surveys in OLYM; the majority of the effort in OLYM has been focused on capturing and radio collaring elk to permit the development of sightability models for application in OLYM. As a result, no estimates of abundance or composition are included in this annual report, only raw counts of the numbers of elk seen in surveys. At MORA each of the two trend count areas (North Rainier herd, and South Rainier herd) were surveyed twice. 290 and 380 elk were counted on the two replicates in the North Rainier herd, and 621 and 327 elk counted on the two replicate South Rainier counts. At Olympic National Park, each of three spring trend count areas was surveyed once in March 2010. 27 elk were observed in the South Fork Hoh trend count area, 137 elk were observed in the Hoh trend count area, and 131 elk were observed in the Queets trend count area. In September 2010, 18 elk were captured and fitted with radio collars as part of a contracted animal capture, eradication and tagging of animals (ACETA) operation. These animals will be available to contribute double-observer sightability data in future spring and summer surveys. There were no summer surveys for elk in OLYM in 2010.

Washington↗