USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · 70199102

Columbia River Basin dreissenid mussel monitoring forum workshop

Abstract

To address actions identified in the Department of Interior’s “Safeguarding the West” strategy, the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission (PSMFC) and US Geological Survey (USGS) convened 43 invasive species coordinators and scientific experts June 5-6, 2018 in Portland, Oregon to assess the status of dreissenid monitoring efforts in the Columbia River Basin (CRB); identify key strengths and weaknesses of existing collaborative efforts to monitor for dreissenids; identify priority monitoring gaps foundational to dreissenid prevention efforts; and achieve consensus on a set of strategies to address those gaps and maintain a strong monitoring collaborative and framework moving forward. Prior to the workshop, two webinars were conducted to summarize how states and provinces are estimating and using metrics that describe dreissenid mussel introduction (i.e., the risk of mussels being introduced into a waterbody) and establishment (i.e., the risk of a mussel population becoming established after an introduction event). The goal of the webinars was to provide context to discussions at the Columbia River Basin Dreissenid Mussel Monitoring Forum. As part of the webinars expert practitioners, gave presentations that summarized the origins and basis for metrics typically used to characterize invasive species invasion risk. During the first webinar which was held on May 7, 2018, Dr. Bob McMahon, University of Texas at Arlington gave a presentation discussing factors affecting the establishment of dreissenid mussels. During the second webinar which was held on May 30, 2018, Samuel Fischer and Mark Lewis from the University of Alberta presented information on factors affecting the introduction of mussels. Presentations at the workshop were given to update participants on the status of dreissenid mussel monitoring in the Columbia River Basin. Staff from the US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), USGS, Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and National Park Service (NPS) gave presentations that described the status of dreissenid mussel monitoring efforts conducted by federal agencies. Participants also heard presentations on the status of other monitoring related efforts. Representatives from the Western Regional Panel and Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks (MFWP) presented information about method and protocol standardization coordination activities. Staff from the British Columbia Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy also presented an update on their sampling and resource allocation protocols. The USGS then presented an overview of the evolution and status of dreissenid mussel monitoring in the CRB as well as summary of the results of webinars that addressed facets of dreissenid mussel introduction and establishment risk estimation. To facilitate learning from ongoing efforts that address similar invasive species coordination, monitoring, and research activities, Kelly Baerwaldt, US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) presented remotely on the activities of the Asian Carp Coordinating Committee, informing workshop participants of the how the effort formed and is funded, priority goals and activities, as well as key successes and challenges. The meeting culminated with workshop attendees participating in four breakout groups (risk assessment and research, data/lab analysis, monitoring/coordination, and funding) to identify priority key gaps or weaknesses to existing monitoring/coordination efforts as well as identify priority actions or strategies could help address those gaps or weaknesses. The recommended priority actions from each breakout group were compiled into one overall recommendation to build on existing strengths and address weaknesses associated with monitoring for dreissenids in the Columbia River Basin: Using existing infrastructure and datasets, develop a transboundary, interagency, adaptive, coordinated, regional monitoring framework/partnership to ensure optimal resource allocation.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Lisa DeBruyckere, Timothy D. Counihan, Stephen Phillips. 2018. Columbia River Basin dreissenid mussel monitoring forum workshop. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70199102

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Time-to-depth conversion of seismic-reflection data from eastern Lake Superior and implications for the eastern arm of the Midcontinent Rift

Seismic-reflection data were acquired in the mid 1980s along several lines across eastern Lake Superior by industry and the Great Lakes International Multidisciplinary Program on Crustal Evolution (GLIMPCE) (Fig. 1). The lines form part of a larger network of crossing lines over the entire lake, which can be used to develop three-dimensional geologic models of the Mesoproterozoic Midcontinent Rift that lies below. To better interpret these lines, we developed velocity models to convert seismic reflections versus two-way travel time (TWTT) to reflections versus depth. In addition, the velocity models themselves provide insights into the structure of the Midcontinent Rift by recognizing common velocity ranges for certain rock types (Grauch, 2023).

eastern Lake Superior

Revisiting the utility of regional-scale, high-quality geophysical data in mineral exploration - A case study featuring the Mammoth Magnetic Anomaly, Pinal County, Arizona

Regional aeromagnetic surveys passively measure the total magnetic intensity (TMI) and are a foundational tool used in mineral exploration (Airo, 2015). With the increased global demand and the number of critical mineral resources required for manufacturing high-tech devices, developing high-quality, regional-scale geophysical surveys could aid critical mineral exploration efforts and geologic mapping. In 2019, the U. S. Geological Survey launched the Earth Mapping Resources Initiative (Earth MRI) to modernize the geologic and geophysical mapping of regions that have the potential to contain critical mineral resources within the United States. In support of planning Earth MRI geophysical surveys, Drenth and Grauch (2019) defined five aeromagnetic data quality rankings (rank 1 through rank 5) applying them to the airborne geophysical survey inventory of the United States (Johnson et al., 2021). Rank 1 aeromagnetic surveys are of the highest quality, meeting modern standards and allowing best practices for qualitative and quantitative interpretation; whereas rank 5 aeromagnetic surveys are of the lowest quality, being useful only for qualitative interpretation of broad features. Through the Earth MRI effort, 48 high-quality, regional-scale rank 1 and 2 airborne magnetic and radiometric geophysical surveys have been planned, collected, or publicly release through May 2025 (U. S. Geological Survey, 2025). Here, a portion of a rank 1 Earth MRI aeromagnetic survey in southeast Arizona is presented and compared to a legacy rank 5 aeromagnetic survey over the Mammoth Magnetic Anomaly (MMA), demonstrating how modern, high-quality aeromagnetic data improves our view of crustal geology, aiding mineral exploration.

Arizona

Early Miocene volcanic rocks and associated tectonics, Lava Hills and southern Bristol Mountains, California

Volcanic rocks of latest Oligocene to early Miocene age form an east-west belt across part of the central eastern Mojave Desert from the Whipple Mountains on the east to the Rosamond Hills on the west. We term this the central belt because it is separated from northern and southern belts by swaths with no volcanic rocks. Limited geochronologic data indicate that much of the belt is latest Oligocene and early Miocene in age, about 24 to 19 Ma, a finding that is consistent with these rocks being overlain by the 18.8 Ma Peach Spring Tuff in many places. We describe Miocene geology in a central area of the belt, in the Lava Hills, southern Bristol Mountains, and southern Old Dad Mountains. Sedimentary basins formed coeval with early andesite to rhyolite volcanism, progressing from fluvial and lacustrine tuffaceous sandstone to volcanic lavas, tuffs, and breccias, indicating that early basins formed proximal to volcanic edifices. Higher strata are fluvial and lacustrine with lavas punctuating the sequence. Although basins may partly have been formed within topographic lows bounded by volcanic domes, plateaus, and stratovolcanoes, consistent stratigraphic sections over wide areas indicate that tectonic basin evolution affected broad areas. The volcanic section is capped by local basalt flows and the regional Peach Spring Tuff. Limited data on normal faults support interpretations of early extensional basin development caused by northeast-southwest oriented stretching. Later extension caused stratal rotations, tilting early deposits down to the southwest. This tilted and subsequently beveled basin architecture was overlain by the youngest volcanic deposits, primarily rhyolite and basalt. The Peach Spring Tuff, 18.8 Ma, lies within this upper unit. Similar stratigraphic and structural relations are exposed in the nearby Marble Mountains and Van Winkle Mountain sections, reinforcing that a broad area underwent similar volcanism and tectonism. In our study area the upper unit is only very gently tilted except near dextral strike-slip faults of the eastern California shear zone. These late Miocene to Recent faults are represented as four main fault zones spaced about 5 km apart, representing distributed shear north of the Bristol Lake basin.

California