SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Report”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

USGS2018

Assessment of capacity-building activities for forest measurement, reporting, and verification, 2011–15

This report was written as a collaborative effort between the U.S. Geological Survey, SilvaCarbon, and Wageningen University with funding provided by the U.S. Agency for International Development and the European Space Agency, respectively, to address a pressing need for enhanced result-based monitoring and evaluation of delivered capacity-building activities. For this report, the capacity-building activities delivered by capacity-building providers (referred to as “providers” hereafter) during 2011–15 (the study period) to support countries in building measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV) systems for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) were assessed and evaluated. Summarizing capacity-building activities and outcomes across multiple providers was challenging. Many of the providers did not have information readily available, which precluded them from participating in this study despite the usefulness of their information. This issue led to a key proposed future action: Capacity-building providers could establish a central repository within the Global Forestry Observation Initiative (GFOI; http://www.gfoi.org/ ) where data from past, current, and future activities of all capacity-building providers could be stored. The repository could be maintained in a manner to continually learn from previous lessons. Although various providers monitored and evaluated the success of their capacity-building activities, such evaluations only assessed the success of immediate outcomes and not the overarching outcomes and impacts of activities implemented by multiple providers. Good monitoring and evaluation should continuously monitor and periodically evaluate all factors affecting the outcomes of a provided capacity-building activity. The absence of a methodology to produce quantitative evidence of a causal link between multiple capacity-building activities delivered and successful outcomes left only a plausible association. A previous publication argued that plausible association, although not a precise measurement of cause and effect, was a realistic tool. Our review of the available literature on this subject did not find another similar assessment to assess capacity-building activities for supporting the countries in building MRV system for REDD+. Four countries from the main forested regions of Africa, the Americas, and Asia were chosen as subjects for this report based on the length of time SilvaCarbon and other providers have provided capacity-building activities toward MRV system for REDD+: Colombia (the Americas), the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC; Africa), Peru (the Americas), and the Republic of the Philippines (referred to as “the Philippines” hereafter; Asia). Several providers were contacted for information to include in this report, but, because of various constraints, only SilvaCarbon, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) participated in this study. These three providers supported various targeted capacity-building activities through-out Africa, the Americas, and Asia, including the following: technical workshops at national and regional levels (referred to as “workshops” hereafter), hands on training, study tours, technical details by experts, technical consultation between providers and recipients, sponsorship for travel, organizing network meetings, developing sampling protocols, assessing deforestation and degradation drivers, estimating carbon stock and flow, designing monitoring systems for multiple uses, promoting public-private partnerships to scale up investments on MRV system for REDD+, and assisting with the design of national forest monitoring systems. Their activities were planned in coordination with key partners in each country and region and with the support and assistance of other providers. Note that several other organizations and institutions assisted the providers to deliver capacity-building activities, including Boston University, Conservation International, Stanford University, University of Maryland, and Wageningen University & Research.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2023

U.S. Geological Survey risk research community of practice 2021 workshop report—Workshop on considering equitable engagement in research design

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Risk Research and Applications Community of Practice (Risk CoP) is a bureau-wide forum to share resources and discuss issues relevant to “conducting and applying scientific research in hazards—the dangerous processes or phenomena that may cause damage—to enhance the reduction of risk—the potential for societally relevant losses caused by hazards” (Ludwig and others, 2018). In 2021, this group held a workshop entitled “Considering Equitable Engagement in Research Design” as a part of its annual meeting. This report is a result of the workshop findings and includes additional input from the Risk CoP, other communities of practice, and subject matter experts across the USGS. The resources described in this report are intended to help guide USGS scientists aiming to include equity into their risk research but can apply to all USGS scientists, regardless of their research focus. This report shares key considerations for equitable engagement as identified by workshop participants, a discussion of the spectrum of engagement in equity-related research, and a toolkit that can help USGS scientists consider how to integrate equity into their work. Although this report is not comprehensive, it does seek to fill a gap that exists at the USGS; at the time of writing, there is no guidance on how to integrate equity into research design. The authors of this report believe that this document can serve as a foundation for future equity-related work at the USGS.

Open-File Report↗

USGS1939

Geological report on water conditions at Platt National Park, Oklahoma

Platt National Park, located in southern Oklahoma, containing 842 acres, was established by Acts of Congress in 1902, 1904, and 1906. The reason for the setting aside of this area was the presence in the area of some 30 'mineral' springs, the water from which contains sulphur, bromide, salt, and other minerals, which are believed to possess medicinal qualities. For many generations the sulphur springs of the Chickasaw Nation had been known for their reputed healing qualities. It had long been the custom for families to come from considerable distances on horseback and in wagons and camp near the springs, in order to drink the water. In course of time a primitive town, known as Sulphur Springs, grew up near a group of springs known since as Pavilion Springs at the mouth of Sulphur Creek, now known as Travertine Creek. This town was still in existence at the time of my first visit to the locality in July, 1901. At this time, in company with Joseph A. Taff, of the United States Geological Survey, I spent a week riding over the country making a preliminary survey looking toward the setting aside of the area for a National Park. After the establishment of the National Park, the old town of Sulphur Springs was abandoned, and when the present boundaries of the park had been established the present town of Sulphur, now county seat of Murray County, grew up. In July 1906, on request of Superintendent Joseph F. Swords, I visited the park and made an examination of the various springs and submitted a report, dated August 15, 1906, to Secretary of the Interior E.A. Hitchcock. Copies of this report are on file in the Regional Office and at Platt National Park. In this report I set forth the approximate amount of flow of the various springs, the character of the water in each, and the conditions of the springs as of that date. I also made certain recommendations regarding proposed improvements of each spring. In this report I say: 'In the town of Sulphur, four wells have been drilled to a depth of between 450 and 500 feet in which artesian water has been secured. These wells are said to flow 200,000 gallons each per day.' I also say: 'From a study of the log of one of these wells, it appears that the artesian water is derived from the upper part of the Simpson sandstone. It is very probable that the water of the springs is derived from the same source.' This early was recognized the relation between the water from the mineral springs and that from the artesian wells. As the years have passed, other wells have been drilled in the town of Sulphur, chiefly to supply water for mineral baths and for swimming pools, so that to date more than 30 wells have been drilled. The exact number is not known. The custom has usually been to turn the wells loose and permit them to flow at full capacity, although some of the wells have been 'valved in' and the flow reduced. An estimate furnished me by the Secretary of the Chamber of Commerce in 1937, referred to later in this report, indicated that at that time 16 wells were flowing approximately 28,800,000 gallons of water per day, practically all of which ran to waste. For many years geologists in Oklahoma and elsewhere have watched this unrestricted waste of water from the artesian wells at Sulphur with growing concern. Remembering the history of other artesian basins throughout the world, these geologists believed that in all probability it was only a question of time until the water in the Sulphur artesian basin would begin to fail. On two different occasions the State Geologist of Oklahoma, bearing these conditions in mind, has prepared and had introduced into the State Legislature a bill which, if enacted into law, would have regulated the flow of water in artesian wells throughout the State. Both bills died in committee. Partly on account of the drought of the past three years, the matter has been brought to a head. In September 1938, Buffalo and Antelope Springs at the hea

Open-File Report↗

USGS1950

Second progress report on the cooperative investigation of springs and stream flow in the Tecolote Tunnel area of Santa Barbara County, California

This report represents the second of a series of progress reports giving the results of discharge measurements made at more than 100 locations in the Santa Ynez Mountains from the Refugio Canyon on the west to the San Marcos Pass and Painted Cave area on the east. The flow in all the developed springs and headwater streams within this area, here designated as the Tecolote Tunnel Area of the purpose of this report, is generally measured monthly. The primary purpose of this second progress report is to make available to the public all factual data regarding the flow at these locations obtained since the preparation of the first progress report, issued in May 1949. Near the mid-point of this area the Bureau of Reclamation and the Santa Barbara County Water Agency proposed a tunnel, known as Tecolote Tunnel, for the purpose of diverting a portion of the runoff of the Santa Ynez River drainage area into water-deficient Santa Barbara and the coastal areas to the east and west, Because the water users of the mountain springs in the Tecolote Tunnel Area are somewhat apprehensive as to the influence this tunnel may have on their present water supply, the Santa Barbara Water Agency has requested the Geological Survey to obtain records of flow in their springs at frequent and regular intervals. During the current fiscal year these observations have been made as a result of a cooperative agreement between the Geological Survey and the Santa Barbara County Water Agency whereby each paid half the cost of the investigation. During the previous fiscal year all the costs to the Geological Survey in obtaining these observations were completely reimbursed by the Bureau of Reclamation.

California↗

USGS1972

Documentation and environment of the Apollo 16 samples a preliminary report

This catalog is a working document that shows the locations from which samples were collected during the Apollo 16 mission, and that provides a descriptive geologic context for each sample. It is a compilation of notes from work in progress, and supersedes an earlier report prepared by the Apollo Lunar Geology Investigation Team. The information in this report was obtained from the Air-to-Ground transcript from the astronaut crew, from lunar surface television, from 60 mm Hasselblad camera photographs, and from available LRL "mugshot" photographs of the samples. The sample descriptions are based on these sources of data, and do not reflect the more detailed examination that is presently underway in the LRL. The report is still a preliminary study due to the short time available to review the rather copious data. The rocks have yet to be examined under collimated light and checked against the lunar surface photographs to make identification certain in all cases. The original orientation of the samples will, in time, as ascertained and photographically documented, and will be the subject of a final report on sample documentation. The reader will find inconsistencies in the format throughout the report (and probably some errors). But we believe that it is more important to disseminate these data early rather than to delay with detailed editing sufficient to completely standardize the format.

Open-File Report↗

USGS1972

Progress report: Apollo 16 sample documentation

This report is intended as a working document for use during the opening of the Apollo 16 sample containers and during the early phases of examination of the samples in the Lunar Receiving Laboratory (LRL). The information in this report was drawn from voice transcripts of the astronaut crew while on the lunar surface, from video tapes of lunar surface television, and from a "quick-look" at the returned 60 mm Hasselblad photographs. The planimetric station maps were compiled almost entirely from the television tapes. A thorough review of all data, plus a comparison of the rocks shown in the photographs with those in the LRL, should eliminate any errors or discrepancies. A major purpose of this document is, in fact, to point up gaps in our present knowledge of sample location, orientation, and documentation. This report will be superseded by a more accurate and complete report about two weeks hence. All sample numbers in the illustrations refer to container numbers. Those that have LRL numbers assigned as of this date are cross-referenced in table 1. The illustrations are grouped in order of ascending station numbers (fig. 1), and where possible are shown in order of ascending container numbers for each station. Table 1 also refers container numbers to pane numbers of this report.

Open-File Report↗

USGS1973

Index of metallic mineral deposits of Alaska compiled from reports in open files of the U.S. Geological Survey and U.S. Bureau of Mines through 1972

This index supplements a similar index of published reports (Cobb, 1973) currently being processed for formal publication. Inasmuch as many open-file reports are preliminary and eventually superseded by final published reports, it is inappropriate to include references to open-file reports in a permanent index. As most preliminary reports are of immediate, although temporary, value, it is desirable that references to them be compiled and made available for general use through the medium of open-file release. This index is designed to fill that need.

Open-File Report↗

USGS1974

Geological Survey published reports on Alaska, 1884-1914, indexed by quadrangle

Geological Survey reports published as Annual Reports, Monographs, Special Reports, Professional Papers, Bulletins, and Water Supply Papers are listed by the quadrangles (scale 1:250,000) into which Alaska has been divided for topographic mapping (p. 2). This index does not include any reports that deal solely with administrative matters. Reports that deal with Alaska as a whole or with areas that can not be identified with any specific quadrangle are listed under ALASKA - GENERAL, as are bibliographies, indexes, and similar publications. The ALASKAGENERAL list appears before the alphabetically arranged quadrangle listings.

Alaska↗

USGS1975

Geological Survey and selected U.S. Bureau of Mines and Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys reports and maps on Alaska released during 1974, indexed by quadrangle

All Geological Survey reports and maps on Alaska published or released to open files during 1974 are listed by the quadrangle (scale 1:250,000) into which Alaska has been divided for topographic mapping (p. 2). Also listed are U.S. Bureau of Mines reports on the geology and mineral resources of Alaska, but not those dealing exclusively with other subjects such as economics. Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys published reports on geology and mineral resources are listed, but those released to open files are not. This is because all open-file reports and maps were withdrawn in 1974 for revision, consolidation, or assignment of new identification numbers before possible reissue. At the time of preparation of this index I had received so few newly released open-file reports that I felt that including any of them might cause confusion to potential users because of possible duplication of titles or numbers.

Alaska↗

USGS1977

Summaries of selected maps, reports, and presentations on energy resources and marine geology approved for release during 1976 and January-May 1977

The U. S. Geological Survey conducts geological and geophysical investigations to assess the Nation's resources of energy minerals, including those that may be located in offshore areas under United States jurisdiction, to identify environmental hazards that may affect or result from energy mineral development activities on the Outer Continental Shelf, and to investigate other geologic resources of the Nation's offshore areas. This scientific research program is divided among six operating branches: Chemical Resources, Coal Resources, Oil and Gas Resources, Uranium-Thorium Resources, Atlantic-Gulf of Mexico Geology, and Pacific-Arctic Geology. The first four branches are organized as the Office of Energy Resources and the last two form the Office of Marine Geology. The scientists and technical personnel of these branches present the results of their research and mapping in reports of many types. Most of these reports are written for specialists in energy resources or marine geology, but even those reports with a broader scientific appeal may have limited distribution and fail to reach many who have interests in the results. Even those that are disseminated widely do not consistently reach the broad audience for which they are intended. This quarterly describes significant results of the research and mapping that are presented in technical reports prepared by scientists of the six branches, and shows how the results contribute to program objectives and to the advancement of public interests and knowledge. In this issue, we provide brief summaries of selected reports and maps that have been published, are pending publication, or have otherwise been released during 1976 and the first five months of 1977. Subsequent issues will include summaries of other articles published during this period as well as those approved for publication subsequently.

Open-File Report↗

USGS1979

U.S. Geological Survey seismic engineering data report, 1974-75 records; strong-motion earthquake accelerograms digitization and analysis

This is the fourth of a series of reports planned to include the results of digitization and routine analyses of strong-motion earthquake accelerograms published by the U.S. Geological Survey. Serving as a model for this effort is the collection of data reports published by the Earthquake Engineering Research Laboratory of the California Institute of Technology during the years 1969 - 1975 and covering the significant records of the period from 1933 up to the San Fernando earthquake of February 9, 1971. Earlier reports in the present series have covered records from 1971, Peru, and 1972 (USGS Open File Report Nos. 76-609, 77-587, and 78-941, respectively). The present report includes a selection of 1974 and 1975 records.

Open-File Report↗

USGS1980

Planning report for the southwest alluvial basins (east) regional aquifer-system analysis, parts of Colorado, New Mexico, and Texas

The study of the Southwest alluvial basins (east) will involve an analysis of the regional aquifer system in parts of Colorado, New Mexico, and Texas. This area has been divided into 22 basins. The study of the alluvial aquifer-system will be made in the following stages: (1) project planning, (2) literature searches, (3) compiling existing data, (4) data collection, (5) basin modeling, (6) regional aquifer modeling, and (7) reports. The regional aquifer study will be accomplished through studying each of the 22 basins. Data compilation and limited data collection will be part of each basin study. Digital computer models will be made for those basins where data are sufficient. A regional aquifer model will be developed from the basin models. In addition to this report, there will be basin hydrology reports and the final regional report. Included in the final report will be a description of the regional hydrology and geology. (USGS)

Open-File Report↗

USGS1982

Update 1, April 1982: Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas activities in the North Atlantic and their onshore impacts: A summary report, July 1981

In July 1981, the Office of Outer Continental Shelf Information (OCSI) issued the initial North Atlantic Summary Report for the North Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Region. It provided State and local governments with current information about OCS oil and gas resources and related offshore and onshore activities in the North Atlantic Region, from New Jersey to Maine. The report was intended to assist in the planning for the onshore impacts of OCS activities in the North Atlantic States. Updates to summary reports are published approximately every 6 months in order to provide supplemental information to the summary reports. Revisions to summary reports are published only when a new OCS lease sale is held or when a commercial discovery is announced in that OCS region.

North Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf↗

USGS1987

Report of the River Master of the Delaware River for the period December 1, 1985, to November 30, 1986

A Decree of the Supreme Court of the United States in 1954 established the position of Delaware River Master. The Decree authorizes diversions of water from the Delaware River Basin (Figure 1) and requires compensating releases from certain reservoirs of the City of New York to be made under the supervision and direction of the River Master. Reports to the Court, not less frequently than annually, were stipulated. During the 1986 report year, December 1, 1985, to November 30, 1986, precipitation and runoff varied from below average to above average in the Delaware River Basin. For the year as a whole, precipitation was 4.3 inches above average. Runoff was near average. Operations were under a status of drought at the beginning of the report year. The drought emergency was terminated on December 18, 1985, by the Delaware River Basin Commission, and operations were returned to normal as prescribed by the Decree for the remainder of the report yr. Storage in the reservoirs increased to capacity during the winter months and all New York City Delaware River Basin reservoirs spilled throughout the year. Diversions from Delaware River Basin by New York City and New Jersey did not exceed those authorized by the terms of the Amended Decree. Releases were made as directed by the River Master at rates designed to meet the Montague flow objective on 69 days during the June to November period. Releases were made at conservation rates or at rates designed to relieve thermal stress in the streams downstream from the reservoirs at other times. The excess release quantity as defined by the Decree was not expended by end of the report year. New York City complied fully with the terms of the Decree and with the directives of the River Master during the year. (See also W89-04133) (USGS)

Open-File Report↗

USGS1988

Location maps and list of U.S. Geological Survey reports on water resources in Alaska, 1950 to 1988

The objective of this compilation is to provide a listing of water-resources reports in Alaska by location. For the purposes of this report, Alaska has been divided into six geographic sections: Arctic Slope, West, Southwest, East-Central, Southcentral, and Southeast. In addition, reports are cited in the following categories: Statewide and Topical, Trans-Alaska Pipeline System, and Glaciers. The Statewide and Topical reports are not located on maps. The index to the location maps is on the facing page. The numbers on the location maps refer to the bibliographic citations. (Gaps have been left in the numbering system for additional reports in future editions of this compilation.)

Alaska↗

USGS1989

Bibliography of Oklahoma hydrology; reports prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey and principal cooperating agencies, 1901-88

Reports on the hydrology of Oklahoma have been issued by the U.S. Geological Survey since 1901. This bibliography lists reports on hydrology in Oklahoma prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey and the principal State cooperating agencies, the Oklahoma Geological Survey and the Oklahoma Water Resources Board. Of the nearly 350 reports issued from 1901 through 1988, about 200 have been concerned primarily with groundwater; the remainder have dealt with some aspect of surface water, water quality, or geology. The reports are listed by agency and report type, and are indexed both by author and subject. (USGS)

Open-File Report↗

USGS1993

Bibliography of Oklahoma hydrology; reports prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey and principal cooperating agencies, 1901-93

This bibliography lists reports on hydrology in Oklahoma prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey and the principal State cooperating agencies, the Oklahoma Geological Survey and the Oklahoma Water Resources Board. Included are citations of about 550 reports, abstracts, and journal articles issued from 1901 through July 1993. The reports are listed by agency and report type, and are indexed by author, subject, and USGS report number.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2008

Availability, sustainability, and suitability of ground water, Rogers Mesa, Delta County, Colorado: Types of analyses and data for use in subdivision water-supply reports

The population of Delta County, Colorado, like that in much of the Western United States, is forecast to increase substantially in the next few decades. A substantial portion of the increased population likely will reside in rural subdivisions and use residential wells for domestic water supplies. In Colorado, a subdivision developer is required to submit a water-supply plan through the county for approval by the Colorado Division of Water Resources. If the water supply is to be provided by wells, the water-supply plan must include a water-supply report. The water-supply report demonstrates the availability, sustainability, and suitability of the water supply for the proposed subdivision. During 2006, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with Delta County, Colorado, began a study to develop criteria that the Delta County Land Use Department can use to evaluate water-supply reports for proposed subdivisions. A table was prepared that lists the types of analyses and data that may be needed in a water-supply report for a water-supply plan that proposes the use of ground water. A preliminary analysis of the availability, sustainability, and suitability of the ground-water resources of Rogers Mesa, Delta County, Colorado, was prepared for a hypothetical subdivision to demonstrate hydrologic analyses and data that may be needed for water-supply reports for proposed subdivisions. Rogers Mesa is a 12-square-mile upland mesa located along the north side of the North Fork Gunnison River about 15 miles east of Delta, Colorado. The principal land use on Rogers Mesa is irrigated agriculture, with about 5,651 acres of irrigated cropland, grass pasture, and orchards. The principal source of irrigation water is surface water diverted from the North Fork Gunnison River and Leroux Creek. The estimated area of platted subdivisions on or partially on Rogers Mesa in 2007 was about 4,792 acres of which about 2,756 acres was irrigated land in 2000. The principal aquifer on Rogers Mesa consists of alluvial-fan deposits that overlie shale and, locally, sandstone. Maps of the base of the aquifer, the water table, and the saturated thickness of the aquifer were prepared from data from the well files of the Colorado Division of Water Resources. The base of the aquifer generally is topographically higher than the valleys of the North Fork Gunnison River and Leroux Creek, and direct hydraulic connection of the aquifer to North Fork Gunnison River and Leroux Creek is limited. The aquifer is recharged primarily by infiltration of surface water diverted for irrigation. Ground water discharges to seeps and springs and through slope deposits at the boundaries of the aquifer. Data from the well files also were used to estimate the specific capacity of wells and to estimate the transmissivity and hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer. A water budget was used to estimate recharge to and discharge from the aquifer. Although storage within the aquifer likely varies seasonally and from year to year, it was assumed that there were no long-term changes in ground-water storage. Estimated average annual recharge to and discharge from the aquifer during November 1998 through October 2006 were about 30,767 acre-feet per year. Although sufficient ground water is available on Rogers Mesa for additional domestic water supplies, conversion of irrigated land to residential land use likely would reduce recharge to the aquifer, affecting the sustainability of ground-water supplies on Rogers Mesa. Stream-depletion analyses indicate that the ground water in the aquifer likely would be considered tributary ground water and additional uses of ground water to supply new subdivisions likely would require implementation of augmentation plans. Although sufficient ground water is available on Rogers Mesa for additional domestic water supplies, conversion of irrigated land to residential land use likely would reduce recharge to the aquifer, affecting the sustainability of ground-water supplies on Rogers Mesa. Stream-depletion analyses indicate that the ground water in the aquifer likely would be considered tributary ground water and additional uses of ground water to supply new subdivisions likely would require implementation of augmentation plans. Although the dissolved solids and dissolved sulfate concentrations in ground water from Rogers Mesa aquifer commonly exceeded the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels for drinking-water supplies, the quality of ground water from the aquifer generally is suitable for residential use. Concentrations of total nitrogen (nitrite plus nitrate, as nitrogen) in ground water ranged from 0.38 to 3.2 milligrams per liter and were less than the State of Colorado maximum contaminant level of 10 milligrams per liter. Concentrations of selenium from seeps and springs at the boundaries of the aquifer commonly exceeded 50 micrograms per liter, the State of Colorado maximum contaminant level for drinking-water supplies. This preliminary evaluation of ground-water supplies on Rogers Mesa could be improved with the collection of additional data including: additional mapping of hydrogeologic features; more accurate locations and altitudes of wells; accurate estimates of water-budget components; measurements of ground-water levels; and collection and analyses of ground-water samples. The use of numerical models of ground-water flow could improve evaluations of the potential effects of changes in land and water use on the water budget, aquifer storage, stream depletion, and well interference.

Colorado↗