USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Monitoring and Response Plan”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 199 records · Page 11Linked to original sources
USGS2019

Repatriated desert bighorn sheep population on the Nevada National Security Site

Ecological studies have been conducted on the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) since the 1960s. Desert bighorn sheep ( Ovis canadensis nelsoni ) were considered rare visitors on the NNSS, with only 9 recorded observations between 1963 and 2009, all of which were males. Females and young were not documented definitively until winter 2011, when several were killed by a radiomarked female mountain lion ( Puma concolor ). Following these observations, we initiated a study of desert bighorn sheep on the NNSS to better understand their movements/interactions with other populations, prevalence of disease, population size, origin, radionuclide burdens and potential radiological dose to humans that may consume harvested animals away from the NNSS. We captured and radiomarked 6 sheep (2 females, 4 males) in November 2015, and 15 (7 females, 8 males) in November 2016. We sampled blood for genetic and disease testing and collected nasal swabs for respiratory disease testing. Sheep from the NNSS spent most of their time around Shoshone Mountain, Fortymile Canyon, and Yucca Mountain but also moved to Bare Mountain, Thirsty Canyon, and Black Mountain. Females greatly expanded their core and overall home ranges during spring, whereas males expanded their home ranges during summer. Of 18 sheep sampled for disease, 12 showed an immune response to Mycoplasma ovipneumoniae , and 5 had the bacteria present. Genetic testing revealed that the ancestry of NNSS sheep is from the Bare Mountain (1991-1995, within 24 km of our study area), Specter Range (1990-1995, within 32 km of our study area), and Stonewall Mountain (1975-1983, within 72 km of our study area) reintroduced populations. Radionuclide burden in NNSS sheep was minimal with no significant difference from sheep captured on the Nevada Test and Training Range and northern Nevada. One marked adult male was legally harvested off the NNSS north of Bare Mountain. This recently colonized reproducing population of sheep on the NNSS warrants further monitoring, protection, and inclusion in resource management plans.

Nevada↗
USGS2013

U.S. Department of the Interior South Central Climate Science Center strategic science plan, 2013--18

The Department of the Interior (DOI) recognizes and embraces the unprecedented challenges of maintaining our Nation’s rich natural and cultural resources in the 21st century. The magnitude of these challenges demands that the conservation community work together to develop integrated adaptation and mitigation strategies that collectively address the impacts of climate change and other landscape-scale stressors. On September 14, 2009, DOI Secretary Ken Salazar signed Secretarial Order 3289 (amended February 22, 2010) entitled, “Addressing the Impacts of Climate Change on America’s Water, Land, and Other Natural and Cultural Resources.” The Order establishes the foundation for two partner-based conservation science entities to address these unprecedented challenges: Climate Science Centers (CSCs and Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs). CSCs and LCCs are the Department-wide approach for applying scientific tools to increase understanding of climate change and to coordinate an effective response to its impacts on tribes and the land, water, ocean, fish and wildlife, and cultural-heritage resources that DOI manages. Eight CSCs have been established and are managed through the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center (NCCWSC); each CSC works in close collaboration with their neighboring CSCs, as well as those across the Nation, to ensure the best and most efficient science is produced. The South Central CSC was established in 2012 through a cooperative agreement with the University of Oklahoma, Texas Tech University, Louisiana State University, the Chickasaw Nation, the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, Oklahoma State University, and NOAA’s Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Lab; hereafter termed the ”Consortium” of the South Central CSC. The Consortium has a broad expertise in the physical, biological, natural, and social sciences to address impacts of climate change on land, water, fish and wildlife, ocean, coastal, and cultural resources. The South Central CSC will provide scientific information, tools, and techniques that managers and other parties interested in land, water, wildlife, and cultural resources can use to anticipate, monitor, and adapt to climate change, actively engaging LCCs and other partners in translating science into management decisions. This document is the first Strategic Science Plan for the South Central CSC (2013-18). Using the January 2011 DOI guidance as a model, this document (1) describes the role and interactions of the South Central CSC among partners and stakeholders including Federal, State, and non-governmental organizations throughout the region; (2) describes a concept of what the center will provide to its partners; (3) defines a context for climate impacts in the south central United States; and (4) establishes the science priorities the center will address through research. Science priorities are currently organized as immediate or future research needs; however, this document is intended to be reevaluated and modified as partner needs change and as scientific work progresses.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2005

Public acceptance of management actions and judgments of responsibility for the wolves of the southern Greater Yellowstone Area: Report to Grand Teton National Park

Introduction Wolves of Grand Teton National Park and the Greater Yellowstone Area Gray wolves (Canis lupus) appeared in Grand Teton National Park (GRTE) in October of 1998, two years after being reintroduced to Yellowstone National Park (YNP). Since that time, five packs have been within the GRTE borders - Gros Ventre Pack, Nez Perce Pack, Yellowstone Delta Pack, Teton Pack, and Green River Pack (Table 1). Wolves in the Greater Yellowstone Area are increasing and spreading out geographically (USFWS and others, 2004). This dispersion was demonstrated recently by the death of a 2-year-old female wolf from the Swan Lake pack on I-70 in Colorado (June 7, 2004; http://mountain-prairie.USFWS.gov/pressrel /04-43.htm). The organization of wolf packs in the GYA is dynamic and highly structured. In 2003, for example, a wolf from the Teton Pack joined with the Green River Pack, and several young wolves left the Teton Pack and moved south (USFWS and others, 2004). Pack size (averaging five to ten members) is dependent on hunting efficiency, which depends on prey size, type, and density. Each pack defends home ranges of several hundred square miles. The social structure of the pack is based on a breeding pair (an alpha male and female). Other wolves in the pack can be categorized as betas (males and/or females second in rank to the alphas), subordinates, pups, and occasional omegas (outcasts). Because generally only the alpha pair breeds, subordinate wolves of reproductive age must disperse from their packs and form new associations in order to breed. (http://www.nps.gov/grte/wolf/biolo.htm). The reintroduced wolves are classified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as "nonessential experimental" under section 10(j) of the Endangered Species Act. The recovery criteria for the GYA wolves were met in 2002 for removing the wolves from the Endangered Species List (30 or more breeding pairs). Currently, the USFWS manages wolf populations in the GYA until delisting occurs. After delisting, state Fish and Wildlife Services in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming will be responsible for managing wolves. Each state must submit a wolf management plan to the USFWS which then must be approved before management shifts occur. As of this writing, the process of delisting the wolves in the state of Wyoming is ongoing. However, the reclassification of wolves nationwide was completed on April 1, 2003. Wolves outside of YNP changed in status from endangered to threatened. The wolves classified in the experimental nonessential population did not change in status (USFWS and others, 2004). This classification of experimental nonessential population allows for flexibility in management decisions concerning the wolves (Smith and others, 2004). For example, control actions in the GYA included trapping and radio-collaring four wolves; intensive monitoring; increasing riders on grazing allotments; harassing wolves with rubber bullets, cracker shells, and lights; moving livestock to different pastures; and issuing four shoot on-sight permits. When non-lethal control methods were not effective, wolves were killed in an attempt to prevent further livestock depredations (USFWS and others, 2004; Table 1). At the same time that wolf numbers are rising, human population statistics in the GRTE area are also rising. The population of Teton County, Wyoming in 1990 was just over 11,000 people; today that number has increased to approximately 19,000 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2005). park visitation for GRTE has been substantial over the last several years with an average visitation of 2.5 million visitors (NPS, 2004a). Furthermore, land ownership surrounding GRTE and the establishment of grazing rights within park boundaries are problem areas for wolf-human interactions due to livestock depredation. With increasing numbers of visitors, residents, and livestock it is reasonable to assume that conflicts are going to increase also. In 1950, GRTE was expanded to in

Open-File Report↗
USGS2004

Development of a long-term sampling network to monitor restoration success in the southwest coastal Everglades: Vegetation, hydrology, and sediments

Introduction and History Hurricane Andrew, a Category 5 storm, crossed the southern Florida peninsula on the morning of August 24, 1992. Following the storm, the National Park Service conducted an environmental damage assessment to gauge the storm's impacts on the natural resources of south Florida Park Service holdings. Although hurricanes have impacted Park Service lands such as the Everglades in the past, no systematic, permanent sampling scheme has been established to monitor long-term recovery (or lack thereof) following disturbance. In October 1992, vegetation monitoring plots were established in heavily damaged areas of mangrove forest on the southwest coast of the Everlgades, along the Lostmans and Broad Rivers. As the permanent plot network was being established, funding was awarded for the South Florida Global Climate Change project (SOFL-GCC). This led to the establishment of a network of hydrological monitoring stations. Finally, sediment elevation tables (SETs) were installed at many locations. SETs provide the means to measure very small changes (2 mm) in the sediment surface elevation accurately over time. We also set up marker horizons to measure accretion of sediment at each site. Sampling sites were located along three transects extending from upstream freshwater wetlands to downstream saltwater wetlands along the Shark, Lostmans and Chatham Rivers in Everglades National Park. While we were developing our sampling network for basic scientific research needs, concern mounted over the health of the Greater Everglades Ecosystem and in particular over the influence of decreased freshwater flows. Ecosystem restoration planning was begun, resulting in the multi-agency, $8 billion Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP). Our co-located sampling networks allow us to track the interaction of hydrology, sediment, and vegetation over time, and will provide the opportunity to monitor the progress of the Everglades restoration and to gauge its success. Our earlier research questions have been modified over time to place a major emphasis on CERP needs, while still recognizing the importance of other processes, including disturbance and sea-level rise. Our research addresses processes relevant to the following restoration and related questions: * How will increasing freshwater flow affect wetland primary production? * Will increasing freshwater inflow alter nutrient availability? * Does recovery following disturbance in mangroves depend on freshwater inflow? * Will the position of vegetation ecotones change in response to upstream water management? * What will be the influence of global climate change, such as sea-level rise, on the Everglades restoration? * Will processes of wetlands soil formation be altered by sea-level rise and changed freshwater inflow?

Florida↗
USGS2013

Defining a data management strategy for USGS Chesapeake Bay studies

The mission of U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Chesapeake Bay studies is to provide integrated science for improved understanding and management of the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem. Collective USGS efforts in the Chesapeake Bay watershed began in the 1980s, and by the mid-1990s the USGS adopted the watershed as one of its national place-based study areas. Great focus and effort by the USGS have been directed toward Chesapeake Bay studies for almost three decades. The USGS plays a key role in using “ecosystem-based adaptive management, which will provide science to improve the efficiency and accountability of Chesapeake Bay Program activities” (Phillips, 2011). Each year USGS Chesapeake Bay studies produce published research, monitoring data, and models addressing aspects of bay restoration such as, but not limited to, fish health, water quality, land-cover change, and habitat loss. The USGS is responsible for collaborating and sharing this information with other Federal agencies and partners as described under the President’s Executive Order 13508—Strategy for Protecting and Restoring the Chesapeake Bay Watershed signed by President Obama in 2009. Historically, the USGS Chesapeake Bay studies have relied on national USGS databases to store only major nationally available sources of data such as streamflow and water-quality data collected through local monitoring programs and projects, leaving a multitude of other important project data out of the data management process. This practice has led to inefficient methods of finding Chesapeake Bay studies data and underutilization of data resources. Data management by definition is “the business functions that develop and execute plans, policies, practices and projects that acquire, control, protect, deliver and enhance the value of data and information.” (Mosley, 2008a). In other words, data management is a way to preserve, integrate, and share data to address the needs of the Chesapeake Bay studies to better manage data resources, work more efficiently with partners, and facilitate holistic watershed science. It is now the goal of the USGS Chesapeake Bay studies to implement an enhanced and all-encompassing approach to data management. This report discusses preliminary efforts to implement a physical data management system for program data that is not replicated nationally through other USGS databases.

Chesapeake Bay↗
USGS2004

Fort Collins Science Center: Ecosystem Dynamics

Many challenging natural resource management issues require consideration of a web of interactions among ecosystem components. The spatial and temporal complexity of these ecosystem problems demands an interdisciplinary approach integrating biotic and abiotic processes. The goals of the Ecosystem Dynamics Branch are to provide sound science to aid federal resource managers and use long-term, place-focused research and monitoring on federal lands to advance ecosystem science. Current studies fall into five general areas. Herbivore-Ecosystem Interactions examines the efficacy of multiple controls on selected herbivore populations and cascading effects through predator-herbivore-plant-soil linkages. Riparian Ecology is concerned with interactions among streamflow, fluvial geomorphology, and riparian vegetation. Integrated Fire Science focuses on the effects of fire on plant and animal communities at multiple scales, and on the interactions between post-fire plant, runoff, and erosion processes. Reference Ecosystems comprises long-term, place-based studies of ecosystem biogeochemistry. Finally, Integrated Assessments is investigating how to synthesize multiple ecosystem stressors and responses over complex landscapes in ways that are useful for management and planning.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2012

Assessment of nutrients and suspended sediment conditions in and near the Agassiz National Wildlife Refuge, Northwest Minnesota, 2008–2010

In response to concerns about water-quality impairments that may affect habitat degradation in Agassiz National Wildlife Refuge in northwest Minnesota, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service collected streamflow data, discrete nutrient and suspended- sediment samples, and continuous water-quality data from 2008 to 2010. Constituent loads were estimated for nutrients and suspended sediment using sample data and streamflow data. In addition, a potential water-quality and streamflow monitoring program design was developed for Agassiz National Wildlife Refuge. Results from this study can be used by resource managers to address identified impairments and protect wildlife habitat and public water supply, and may contribute toward developing more effective water-management plans for Agassiz National Wildlife Refuge.

Minnesota↗
USGS2003

The National Map: from geography to mapping and back again

When the means of production for national base mapping were capital intensive, required large production facilities, and had ill-defined markets, Federal Government mapping agencies were the primary providers of the spatial data needed for economic development, environmental management, and national defense. With desktop geographic information systems now ubiquitous, source data available as a commodity from private industry, and the realization that many complex problems faced by society need far more and different kinds of spatial data for their solutions, national mapping organizations must realign their business strategies to meet growing demand and anticipate the needs of a rapidly changing geographic information environment. The National Map of the United States builds on a sound historic foundation of describing and monitoring the land surface and adds a focused effort to produce improved understanding, modeling, and prediction of land-surface change. These added dimensions bring to bear a broader spectrum of geographic science to address extant and emerging issues. Within the overarching construct of The National Map, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is making a transition from data collector to guarantor of national data completeness; from producing paper maps to supporting an online, seamless, integrated database; and from simply describing the Nation’s landscape to linking these descriptions with increased scientific understanding. Implementing the full spectrum of geographic science addresses a myriad of public policy issues, including land and natural resource management, recreation, urban growth, human health, and emergency planning, response, and recovery. Neither these issues nor the science and technologies needed to deal with them are static. A robust research agenda is needed to understand these changes and realize The National Map vision. Initial successes have been achieved. These accomplishments demonstrate the utility of The National Map to the Nation and give confidence in evolving its future applications.

Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing↗
USGS2012

Foreword: Contributions of Arctic PRISM to monitoring western hemispheric shorebirds

Long-term monitoring of populations is of paramount importance to understanding responses of organisms to global environmental change and to evaluating whether conservation practices are yielding intended results through time (Wiens 2009). The population status of many shorebird species, the focus of this volume, remain poorly known. Long-distance migrant shorebirds have proven particularly difficult to monitor, in part because of their highly inaccessible regions. As migrant shorebirds travel the length of the hemisphere, the congregate and disperse in ways that vary among species, locations, and years, presenting serious challenges to designing and implementing monitoring programs. Rigorous field and quantitative methods that estimate population size and monitor trends are vitally needed to direct and evaluate effective conservation measures. Many management efforts depend on unbiased population size estimates; for examples, the shorebird conservation plans for both Canada and the United States seek to restore populations to levels calculated for the 1970s based on the best information available from existing surveys. Further, federal wildlife agencies within the United States and Canada have mandates to understand the state of their nations' resources under various conventions for the protection of migratory birds. Accurate estimates of population size are vital statistics for a variety of conservation activities, such as prioritizing species for conservation action and setting management targets. Areas of essential habitat, such as those designated under the Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network, the Important Bird Areas program of BirdLife Internationals and the National Audubon Society, or Canada's National Wildlife Areas program, are all evaluated on the basis of proportions of species' populations which they contain. The size, and trends in size, of a species' population are considered key information for assessing its vulnerability and subsequent listing under the U.S. Endangered Species Act and the Canadian Species at Risk Act. To meet the need for information on population size and trends, shorebird biologists from Canada and the United States proposed a shared blueprint for shorebird monitoring across the Western Hemisphere in the late 1990s; this effort was undertaken in concert with the development of the Canadian and the U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plans. Soon thereafter, partners in the monitoring effort adopted the name "Program for Regional and International Shorebird Monitoring" (PRISM). Among the primary objectives of PRISM were to estimate the population sizes and trends of breeding North American shorebirds and describe their distributions. PRISM members evaluated ongoing and potential monitoring approached to address 74 taxa (including subspecies) and proposed a combination of arctic and boreal breeding surveys, temperate breeding and non-breeding surveys, and neotropical surveys.

Studies in Avian Biology↗
USGS2015

Spatial and temporal migration of a landfill leachate plume in alluvium

Leachate from unlined or leaky landfills can create groundwater contaminant plumes that last decades to centuries. Understanding the dynamics of leachate movement in space and time is essential for monitoring, planning and management, and assessment of risk to groundwater and surface-water resources. Over a 23.4-year period (1986–2010), the spatial extent of the Norman Landfill leachate plume increased at a rate of 7800 m 2 /year and expanded by 878 %, from an area of 20,800 m 2 in 1986 to 203,400 m 2 in 2010. A linear plume velocity of 40.2 m/year was calculated that compared favorably to a groundwater-seepage velocity of 55.2 m/year. Plume-scale hydraulic conductivity values representative of actual hydrogeological conditions in the alluvium ranged from 7.0 × 10 −5 to 7.5 × 10 −4 m/s, with a median of 2.0 × 10 −4 m/s. Analyses of field-measured and calculated plume-scale hydraulic conductivity distributions indicate that the upper percentiles of field-measured values should be considered to assess rates of plume-scale migration, spreading, and biodegradation. A pattern of increasing Cl − concentrations during dry periods and decreasing Cl − concentrations during wet periods was observed in groundwater beneath the landfill. The opposite occurred in groundwater downgradient from the landfill; that is, Cl − concentrations in groundwater downgradient from the landfill decreased during dry periods and increased during wet periods. This pattern of changing Cl − concentrations in response to wet and dry periods indicates that the landfill retains or absorbs leachate during dry periods and produces lower concentrated leachate downgradient. During wet periods, the landfill receives more recharge which dilutes leachate in the landfill but increases leachate migration from the landfill and produces a more concentrated contaminant plume. This approach of quantifying plume expansion, migration, and concentration during variable hydrologic conditions provides increased understanding of plume behavior and migration potential and may be applied at less monitored landfill sites to evaluate potential risks of contamination to downgradient receptors.

Water, Air, & Soil Pollution↗
USGS2014

Methow River Studies, Washington: abundance estimates from Beaver Creek and the Chewuch River screw trap, methodology testing in the Whitefish Island side channel, and survival and detection estimates from hatchery fish releases, 2013

Salmon and steelhead populations have been severely depleted in the Columbia River from factors such as the presence of tributary dams, unscreened irrigation diversions, and habitat degradation from logging, mining, grazing, and others (Raymond, 1988). The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has been funded by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) to provide evaluation of on-going Reclamation funded efforts to recover Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed anadromous salmonid populations in the Methow River watershed, a watershed of the Columbia River in the Upper Columbia River Basin, in north-central Washington State (fig. 1). This monitoring and evaluation program was funded to document Reclamation’s effort to partially fulfill the 2008 Federal Columbia River Power System Biological Opinion (BiOp) (National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, Fisheries Division 2003). This Biological Opinion includes Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPA) to protect listed salmon and steelhead across their life cycle. Species of concern in the Methow River include Upper Columbia River (UCR) spring Chinook salmon ( Oncorhynchus tshawytscha ), UCR summer steelhead ( O. mykiss ), and bull trout ( Salvelinus confluentus ), which are all listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA. The work done by the USGS since 2004 has encompassed three phases of work. The first phase started in 2004 and continued through 2012. This first phase involved the evaluation of stream colonization and fish production in Beaver Creek following the modification of several water diversions (2000–2006) that were acting as barriers to upstream fish movement. Products to date from this work include: Ruttenburg (2007), Connolly and others (2008), Martens and Connolly (2008), Connolly (2010), Connolly and others (2010), Martens and Connolly (2010), Benjamin and others (2012), Romine and others (2013a), Weigel and others (2013a, 2013b, 2013c), and Martens and others (2014). The second phase, initiated in 2008, focuses on the evaluation of the M2 reach (rkm 66– 80) of the mainstem Methow River prior to restoration actions planned by Reclamation and Yakama Nation. The M2 study was designed to help understand the inter-relationships between stream habitat and the life history of various fish species to explain potential success or limitations in response to restoration actions. To help document changes derived by restoration, two reference reaches (Upper Methow between rkm 85 and 90, and Chewuch River between rkm 4 and 11) were identified based on relative lack of disturbance, proximity to the restoration reach, and relative unconfined geomorphology. A control reach (Lower Methow between rkm 57 and 64, also referred to as “Silver Reach”) was 2 identified based on its similar disturbance as the reference reach, proximity to the restoration reach, and relatively unconfined geomorphology. Products to date include Barber and others (2011), Bellmore (2011), Tibbits and others (2012), Bellmore and others (2013), Benjamin and others (2013), Romine and others (2013b), Bellmore and other (2014), Martens and others (2014), and Martens and Connolly (2014). The third phase of work has been to help with the development and to provide data for modeling efforts. Most of the planned M2 reach restoration is focused on the creation or improvement of offchannel habitat, especially side channels. The pre-restoration portion of this study has been documented by Martens and Connolly (2014). Side channel restoration actions were initiated in 2012 (Whitefish Island side channel, also referred to as SC3; rkm 76) and are planned to continue over the next several years. The Whitefish Island side channel was modified to maintain hydrological connection with the mainstem throughout the year. In addition, several log structures were installed and pools were deepened to create fish habitat. Prior to restoration, this side channel would lose hydrological connection with the mainstem Methow River, leaving one large pool near the bottom of the side channel and several shallow isolated pools that may or may not go dry. In seasonally connected side channels, juvenile salmonid survival in pools less than 100 cm average depth was lower than in pools greater than 100 cm average depth (Martens and Connolly, 2014). In this report, we document our field work and analysis completed in 2013. During 2013, USGS sampling efforts were focused on resampling of three reaches in Beaver Creek, testing methodology in the Whitefish Island side channel, conducting hatchery survival estimates, and operating a screw trap on the Chewuch River (funded by Yakama Nation; fig. 1). The Beaver Creek sampling effort was a revisit of three index sites sampled continuously from 2004 to 2007 to look at the fish response to barrier removal. Methodology testing in Whitefish Island side channel was done to determine the best method for evaluating fish populations after restoration efforts in side channels (previous sampling methods were determined to be ineffective after pools were deepened). Hatchery survival estimates were completed to monitor fish survival in the Methow and Columbia Rivers, while the screw trap was operated to estimate migrating fish populations in the Chewuch River and track passive integrated transponder (PIT)-tagged fish. In addition, we maintained a network of PIT-tag interrogation systems (PTIS), assisted Reclamation with fish removal events associated with stream restoration (two people for 9 days; 14 percent of summer field season), and conducted a stream metabolism study designed to help parameterize and calibrate the stream productivity model (Bellmore and others, 2014) with model validation.

Washington↗
USGS2015

Scale-appropriate adaptation strategies and actions in the Northeast and Midwest United States

Climate Change Adaptation is a growing field within conservation and natural resource management. Actions taken toward climate change adaptation account for climate impacts and ecological responses, both current and projected into the future. These actions attempt to accomplish a number of goals, including the conservation of wildlife and ecosystems by reducing vulnerability and increasing resilience. Climate change adaptation strategies and approaches for natural resources can be thought of as part of a continuum of potential actions ranging from 1) options or goals to 2) strategies, 3) approaches, and 4) tactics. There are a range of decision support tools and processes to aid climate change adaptation. This document highlights several including the Adaptation Workbook, Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments, Structured Decision Making, Adaptive Resource Management, and Scenario Planning. It will also provide case studies on the application of these tools across the Northeast and Midwest. Improved, better-integrated, and increasingly coordinated monitoring systems would be helpful to detect, track, and attribute species and habitat shifts to climate change over spatiotemporal scales. We highlight regional examples of projects and programs addressing these challenges. Illustrative case studies of climate change adaptation efforts are presented across landscape/ecoregion, state, and local scales. Appendix 4.1 provides a synthesis of over 900 general, species and habitat-specific adaptation strategies and tactics from 9 regional studies being considered or implemented across the region. The study of climate change adaptation is a relatively new and rapidly growing field focused on preparing for and responding to the current and future impacts of climate change. The goal of this chapter is to highlight different approaches, processes, and tools currently being used across the region through illustrative case studies at varying scales. In addition, we provide a synthesis of numerous species and habitat-specific adaptation strategies and actions from existing assessment reports and management plans, which is intended to showcase a range of possibilities for natural resource management under future global change. This report does not prescribe one specific approach to taking action; instead, we outline a range of adaptation 5 tactics, which will require thoughtful consideration of the needs of the species, habitat, and location, the stakeholders and partners involved, the scale that a decision or policy is being implemented at, and the financial and personnel resources available to managers.

Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Ke↗
USGS2012

Contributions of Arctic PRISM to monitoring western hemispheric shorebirds

Long-term monitoring of populations is of paramount importance to understanding responses oforganisms to global environmental change and to evaluating whether conservation practices are yielding intended results through time (Wiens 2009). The population status of many shorebird species, the focus of this volume, remain poorly known. Long-distance migrant shorebirds have proven particularly difficult to monitor, in part because of their highly migratory nature and ranges that extend into highly inaccessible regions. As migrant shorebirds travel the length of the hemisphere, they congregate and disperse in ways that vary among species, locations, and years, presenting serious challenges to designing and implementing monitoring programs. Rigorous field and quantitative methods that estimate population size and monitor trends are vitally needed to direct and evaluate effective conservation measures. Many management efforts depend on unbiased population size estimates; for example, the shorebird conservation plans for both Canada and the United States seek to restore populations to levels calculated for the 1970s based on the best information available from existing surveys. Further, federal wildlife agencies within the United States and Canada have mandates to understand the state of their nations' resources under various conventions for the protection of migratory birds. Accurate estimates of population size are vital statistics for a variety of conservation activities, such as prioritizing species for conservation action and setting management targets. Areas of essential habitat, such as those designated under the Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network, the Important Bird Areas program of BirdLife International and the National Audubon Society, or Canada's National Wildlife Areas program, are all evaluated on the basis ofproportions of species' populations which they contain. The size, and trends in size, ofa species' population are considered key information for assessing its vulnerability and subsequent listing under the U.S. Endangered Species Act and the Canadian Species at Risk Act. To meet the need for information on population size and trends, shorebird biologists from Canada and the United States proposed a shared blueprint for shorebird monitoring across the Western Hemisphere in the late 1990s; this effort was undertaken in concert with the development of the Canadian and U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plans (Donaldson et al. 2000, Brown et aL 2001). Soon thereafter, partners in the monitoring effort adopted the name "Program for Regional and International Shorebird Monitoring" (PRISM). Among the primary objectives of PRISM were to estimate the population sizes and trends of breeding North American shorebirds and describe their distributions (Bart et al. 2002). PRISM members evaluated ongoing and potential monitoring approaches to address 74 taxa (including subspecies) and proposed a combination of arctic andboreal breeding surveys, temperate breeding and non-breeding surveys, and neotropical surveys.

Book chapter↗
USGS2013

U.S. Geological Survey science for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative: 2011 annual report

This is the fourth report produced by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative (WLCI) to detail annual work activities. In FY2011, there were 37 ongoing, completed, or new projects conducted under the five major multi-disciplinary science and technical-assistance activities: (1) Baseline Synthesis, (2) Targeted Monitoring and Research, (3) Data and Information Management, (4) Integration and Coordination, and (5) Decisionmaking and Evaluation. The four new work activities were (1) development of the Western Energy Citation Clearinghouse, a Web-based energy-resource database of references for literature and on-line resources focused on energy development and its effects on natural resources; (2) a study to support the Sublette County Conservation District in ascertaining potential water-quality impacts to the New Fork River from energy development in the Pinedale Anticline Project Area; (3) a study to test the efficacy of blending high-frequency temporal data provided by Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) sensors and high-resolution Landsat data for providing the fine-resolution data required to evaluate habitat responses to management activities at the landscape level; and (4) a study to examine the seasonal water chemistry of Muddy Creek, including documenting salinity patterns and providing a baseline for assessing potential effects of energy and other development on water quality in the Muddy Creek watershed. Two work activities were completed in FY2011: (1) the assessment of rancher perceptions of energy development in Southwest Wyoming and (2) mapping aspen stands and conifer encroachment using classification and regression tree (CART) analysis for effectiveness monitoring. The USGS continued to compile data, develop geospatial products, and upgrade Web-based products in support of both individual and overall WLCI efforts, including (1) ranking and prioritizing proposed conservation projects, (2) developing the WLCI integrated assessment, (3) developing the WLCI 5-year Conservation Action Plan, and (4) continuing to upgrade the content and improve the functionality of the WLCI Web site. For the WLCI FY2012 annual report, a decision was made to greatly reduce the overall length of the annual report, which will be accomplished by simplifying the report format and focusing on the take-home messages of each work activity for WLCI partners.

Wyoming↗
USGS2018

Overview and progress of the pallid sturgeon assessment framework redesign process

The Pallid Sturgeon Population Assessment Program (PSPAP) was initiated in 2003, and full implementation began in 2006, to monitor the trend of Scaphirhynchus albus (pallid sturgeon) and native fish communities in the Upper and Lower Missouri River Basins. The original PSPAP (v. 1.0) was a catch-effort based monitoring program where population abundance and trend were monitored using a relative index, catch per unit effort. In 2013, the Missouri River Recovery Program (MRRP), led by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), began a reassessment of science and monitoring approaches to support a new river management plan. The need to redesign the PSPAP was triggered by the recognition that the PSPAP v. 1.0 would not be optimally effective in contributing information needed to make decisions about the pallid sturgeon fundamental management objective—to avoid jeopardizing the continued existence of the pallid sturgeon from USACE actions in the Missouri River—identified in the Missouri River Science and Adaptive Management Plan. The fundamental management objective includes two management subobjectives: (1) increase pallid sturgeon recruitment to age 1 and (2) maintain or increase numbers of pallid sturgeon as an interim measure until sufficient and sustained natural recruitment occurs. These two management subobjectives motivated the development of two fundamental information objectives for PSPAP v. 2.0: (1) to provide information needed to quantify recruitment to age 1 and (2) to quantify pallid sturgeon population abundance and trend. The charge to the authors of this report was to develop an approach to monitoring the pallid sturgeon population in the Missouri River that would contribute information toward gauging overall performance of management actions to achieve the fundamental objectives of the MRRP and to potentially improve understanding of linkages from the management activities to population responses. We used transparent and robust processes to identify alternative monitoring designs that meet the fundamental objectives for managing pallid sturgeon in the MRRP, with a focus on simulation models to evaluate the performance of varying monitoring. This report documents the process of comparing potential alternative monitoring design abilities to provide decision-relevant information for management of the species. The process includes evaluation of information content and attendant uncertainties and considers tradeoffs in types of information valued by stakeholders. The anticipated end product of this process will be synthesized in a decision-support tool that can be used to facilitate learning and iterative revisions of the monitoring roadmap.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2007

Field Guide to the Plant Community Types of Voyageurs National Park

INTRODUCTION The objective of the U.S. Geological Survey-National Park Service Vegetation Mapping Program is to classify, describe, and map vegetation for most of the park units within the National Park Service (NPS). The program was created in response to the NPS Natural Resources Inventory and Monitoring Guidelines issued in 1992. Products for each park include digital files of the vegetation map and field data, keys and descriptions to the plant communities, reports, metadata, map accuracy verification summaries, and aerial photographs. Interagency teams work in each park and, following standardized mapping and field sampling protocols, develop products and vegetation classification standards that document the various vegetation types found in a given park. The use of a standard national vegetation classification system and mapping protocol facilitate effective resource stewardship by ensuring compatibility and widespread use of the information throughout the NPS as well as by other Federal and state agencies. These vegetation classifications and maps and associated information support a wide variety of resource assessment, park management, and planning needs, and provide a structure for framing and answering critical scientific questions about plant communities and their relation to environmental processes across the landscape. This field guide is intended to make the classification accessible to park visitors and researchers at Voyageurs National Park, allowing them to identify any stand of natural vegetation and showing how the classification can be used in conjunction with the vegetation map (Hop and others, 2001).

Techniques and Methods↗
USGS2019

California’s exposure to volcanic hazards

The potential for damaging earthquakes, landslides, floods, tsunamis, and wildfires is widely recognized in California. The same cannot be said for volcanic eruptions, despite the fact that they occur in the state about as frequently as the largest earthquakes on the San Andreas Fault. At least ten eruptions have taken place in the past 1,000 years, and future volcanic eruptions are inevitable. The U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) national volcanic threat assessment identifies eight young volcanic areas in California as moderate, high, or very high threat. Of the eight volcanic areas that exist in California, molten rock resides beneath at least seven of these—Medicine Lake volcano, Mount Shasta, Lassen Volcanic Center, Clear Lake volcanic field, the Long Valley volcanic region, Coso volcanic field, and Salton Buttes—and are therefore considered “active” volcanoes producing volcanic earthquakes, toxic gas emissions, hot springs, geothermal systems, and (or) ground movement. The USGS California Volcano Observatory in Menlo Park, California, monitors these potentially hazardous volcanoes to help communities and government authorities understand, prepare for, and respond to volcanic activity. Although volcanic activity can sometimes be forecast, eruptions, like earthquakes or tsunamis, cannot be prevented. Understanding the hazards and identifying what and who is in harm’s way is the first step in mitigating volcanic risk and building community resilience to volcanic hazards. This report, which was prepared in collaboration with the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services and the California Geological Survey, provides a broad perspective on the state’s exposure to volcanic hazards by integrating volcanic hazard information with geospatial data on at-risk populations, infrastructure, and resources. This information is intended to prompt site- and sector-specific vulnerability analyses and preparation of hazard mitigation and response plans.

California↗
USGS2020

The Modern Geological Survey; a model for research, innovation, synthjesis: A USGS perspective

Geological Surveys have long filled the role of providing Earth system science data and knowledge. These functions are increasingly complicated by accelerating environmental and societal change. Here we describe the USGS response to these evolving conditions. Underpinning the USGS approach is the recognition that many of the issues facing the U.S. and the world involve the interaction among geologic, hydrologic, and biologic processes, and how these interactions in turn affect society. Therefore, a goal of USGS planning is fostering interdisciplinary science. This focus is occurring in part through implementation of the recommendations of strategic planning teams. The USGS has also put in place groups building a broad information technology infrastructure as well as identifying and disseminating new Earth science research tools. In addition, the USGS has established an analysis and synthesis center that brings together groups of scientists who address interdisciplinary Earth system science issues. The goal is for these building blocks to evolve towards a comprehensive USGS data and knowledge platform; EarthMAP (Earth Monitoring, Assessment, and Projection). We also recognize that the modern geological survey must be a member of a community of geological surveys contributing data to a global database of 3-dimensional biogeophysical observations and interpretations.

Book chapter↗