USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Technical Report”

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 217 records · Page 12Linked to original sources

Methodology for quantifying biodiversity

Protected and Conserved Areas (PCAs) are usually created and managed for multiple values, with biodiversity conservation being the primary value for most PCAs (see Chapter 1). When using Natural Climate Solutions (NCS) or Ecosystem-based Management (EBM) approaches to climate change mitigation, it is important to ensure that there are no unintended negative consequences on biodiversity and co-benefits for biodiversity are sought. This requires baseline biodiversity information and periodic monitoring. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) has developed a monitoring framework to measure progress (CBD COP 15 2022) towards the GBF. The framework consists of: • headline indicators for national, regional and global monitoring; • global level indicators (collated from yes/no responses in national reports and used to provide a count of the number of countries having undertaken specific activities); • component indicators (which are a list of optional indicators that may apply at global, regional, national and sub-national levels); • complementary indicators (which are a list of optional indicators for thematic or in-depth analysis of each goal and target). Further details of the monitoring framework can be found in Decision 15/5: Monitoring framework for the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (CBD COP 15, 2022). See Table 5.1 for headline indicators and related targets that they measure. These indicators are used to track national progress towards the GBF. However, those designing sub-national or regional PCA frameworks can use them as well. Biodiversity can be measured at different scales, both spatially and temporally, and at different levels and attributes of biological organisation (Noss, 1990). The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2022, December 18) includes goals and targets across scales, with Targets 1 and 3 focused on spatial planning and PCA creation, Targets 2 and 4 focused on restoration and species management to prevent extinction, Target 5 focused on fish stocks, Target 8 on minimising climate change impacts, Target 11 on ecosystem services, and Target 21 on biodiversity information for monitoring the GBF.

IUCN WCPA Protected Area Technical Report Series↗

Estimated minimum discharge rates of the Deepwater Horizon spill— Interim report to the flow rate technical group from the Mass Balance Team

All of the calculations and results in this report are preliminary and intended for the purpose, and only for the purpose, of aiding the incident team in assessing the extent of the spilled oil for ongoing response efforts. Other applications of this report are not authorized and are not considered valid. Because of time constraints and limitations of data available to the experts, many of their estimates are approximate, are subject to revision, and certainly should not be used as the Federal Government's final values for assessing volume of the spill or its impact to the environment or to coastal communities. Each expert that contributed to this report reserves the right to alter his conclusions based upon further analysis or additional information. An estimated minimum total oil discharge was determined by calculations of oil volumes measured as of May 17, 2010. This included oil on the ocean surface measured with satellite and airborne images and with spectroscopic data (129,000 barrels to 246,000 barrels using less and more aggressive assumptions, respectively), oil skimmed off the surface (23,500 barrels from U.S. Coast Guard [USCG] estimates), oil burned off the surface (11,500 barrels from USCG estimates), dispersed subsea oil (67,000 to 114,000 barrels), and oil evaporated or dissolved (109,000 to 185,000 barrels). Sedimentation (oil captured from Mississippi River silt and deposited on the ocean bottom), biodegradation, and other processes may indicate significant oil volumes beyond our analyses, as will any subsurface volumes such as suspended tar balls or other emulsions that are not included in our estimates. The lower bounds of total measured volumes are estimated to be within the range of 340,000 to 580,000 barrels as of May 17, 2010, for an estimated average minimum discharge rate of 12,500 to 21,500 barrels per day for 27 days from April 20 to May 17, 2010.

Louisiana↗

Ground motion and seismic hazard in the central and eastern United States

This report describes work carried out under the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Interagency Agreement to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) “Research to Support NRC’s Seismic Hazard Analyses” for Task 3, “Seismic Hazard and Ground Motion Models.” The focus of this work has been on evaluation of the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA)-East groundmotion models (GMMs) with available ground-motion data and evaluation of alternative methods for characterizing epistemic uncertainty for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA). When the Interagency Agreement commenced, the USGS’s National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) was being updated, and a significant part of the update for the 2018 NSHM included the introduction of new GMMs for the central and eastern United States (CEUS) (Petersen et al., 2020). In addition to the implementation of the then-recently developed NGA-East GMMs (Goulet et al., 2018), the ground-motion characterization for the CEUS in the 2018 NSHM also included a logic-tree branch with weights applied to the updated “adjusted seed” models that were developed as part of the NGA-East process and in updates by the GMM developers. The Statement of Work for Task 3 of the NRC Interagency Agreement to the USGS included the following parts: (1) Describe technically acceptable approaches in combining GMMs for use in PSHA calculations; (2) Evaluate the effect of using different sets of GMMs (NGA-East SSHAC versus NGA-East USGS) on PSHA calculations; (3) Describe the results of the GMM testing against recorded data, and provide a recommendation on the GMMs application for use in the PSHA; (4) Evaluate the impacts of recently updated individual GMMs on the published NGAEast models; and (5) Submit a final Technical Letter Report documenting results of this task. We present results from this work in two sections: (Chapter 1) Updated Central and Eastern United States Ground Motions and Ground-Motion Analyses; and (Chapter 2) Approaches to Combining Ground-Motion Models for Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis in the Central and Eastern United States.

central and eastern United States↗

Selected papers in the applied computer sciences 1992

This compilation of short papers reports on technical advances in the applied computer sciences. The papers describe computer applications in support of earth science investigations and research. This is the third volume in the series "Selected Papers in the Applied Computer Sciences." Listed below are the topics addressed in the compilation: Integration of geographic information systems and expert systems for resource management, Visualization of topography using digital image processing, Development of a ground-water data base for the southeastern Uited States using a geographic information system, Integration and aggregation of stream-drainage data using a geographic information system, Procedures used in production of digital geologic coverage using compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM) technology, and Automated methods for producing a technical publication on estimated water use in the United States.

Bulletin↗

Analysis of vegetation changes in Rock Creek Park, 1991-2007

Vegetation data collected at Rock Creek Park every 4 years during 1991-2007 were analyzed for differences among 3 regions within the park and among years. The variables measured and analyzed were percentage of twigs browsed, percentage of canopy cover, species richness of herbaceous plants, number of tree seedlings in each of 7 height classes, tree seedling stocking rate for low deer density and high deer density areas, percentage of tree and shrub cover < 2 m in height, mean diameter at breast height (DBH) of trees > 1 cm DBH, number of tree stems > 1 cm DBH, species richness of trees and shrubs, and mean height of the 5 tallest trees in each plot quadrant. Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test for differences and, except for some differences in tree species composition among the 3 regions, no differences (P > 0.01) were found among the 3 regions in the variables discussed above. Many of the variables showed very significant differences (P < 0.01) among years, and causative factors should be investigated further. In addition, importance values were calculated for the 10 most important tree species in each region and changes over time were reported. Future sampling recommendations are also discussed.

Natural Resource Technical Report↗

Analysis of the low-flow characteristics of streams in Louisiana

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development, Office of Public Works, used geologic maps, soils maps, precipitation data, and low-flow data to define four hydrographic regions in Louisiana having distinct low-flow characteristics. Equations were derived, using regression analyses, to estimate the 7Q 2 , 7Q 10 , and 7Q 20 flow rates for basically unaltered stream basins smaller than 525 square miles. Independent variables in the equations include drainage area (square miles), mean annual precipitation index (inches), and main channel slope (feet per mile). Average standard errors of regression ranged from +44 to +61 percent. Graphs are given for estimating the 7Q 2 , 7Q 10 , and 7Q 20 for stream basins for which the drainage area of the most downstream data-collection site is larger than 525 square miles. Detailed examples are given in this report for the use of the equations and graphs.

Louisiana↗

Geologic and hydrogeologic framework of the Espa?ola basin -- Proceedings of the 5th annual Espa?ola basin workshop, Santa Fe, New Mexico, March 7-8, 2006

This report presents abstracts of technical studies that are focused on the hydrogeologic framework of the Espa?ola basin, a major subbasin of the Cenozoic Rio Grande rift. The Rio Grande, Rio Chama, Santa Fe River, and their tributaries carry important surface water in the Espa?ola basin. Sediments and interbedded volcanic rocks fill the Espa?ola basin and form extensive aquifer systems for ground water. Surface and ground water provide the principal sources of water for most residents of the basin, including people in the cities of Santa Fe, Espa?ola, and Los Alamos as well as Native Americans in several Pueblos. The abstracts describe results of technical studies that were presented either as poster exhibits or oral presentations at the fifth-annual Espa?ola basin workshop, held March 7-8 of 2006 in Santa Fe, New Mexico. The principal goal of this workshop was to share information about ongoing studies. The Espa?ola basin workshop was hosted by the Espa?ola basin technical advisory group (EBTAG) and sponsored by the U.S. Geological Survey, the New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources, and the Water Research Technical Assistance Office of Los Alamos National Laboratory. Abstracts in this report have been grouped into six information themes: Basic Water Data, Water Quality and Water Chemistry, Water Balance and Stream/Aquifer Interaction, Data Integration and Hydrologic Model Testing, Three-Dimensional Hydrogeological Architecture, and Geologic Framework. Abstracts submitted by U.S. Geological Survey authors in this report have had their technical content peer reviewed before they were included in the report. Technical reviews were not required for abstracts submitted by authors outside the USGS, although most did receive peer reviews within their originating agencies. Taken together, the abstracts in this report provide a view of the current status of hydrogeologic research within the Espa?ola basin.

Open-File Report↗

Ants of the national park of American Samoa

American Samoa makes up the eastern end of the Samoan Archipelago. On the islands of Tutuila, Taʽū and Ofu, the National Park of American Samoa (NPSA) protects about 4,000 ha of coastal, mid-slope and ridge-top forest. While the ant fauna of the Samoan Archipelago is considered relatively well documented, much of NPSA has never been surveyed for ants, leaving the fauna and its distribution poorly known. To address this shortfall, we systematically surveyed ants within the Tutuila and Taʽū units of NPSA using standard methods (hand collecting, litter sifting, and baits) at 39 sites within six vegetation types ranging from 8 to 945 m elevation. Forty-four ant species were identified, 19 of which are exotic to the Samoan Archipelago. Two notoriously aggressive species, Anoplolepis gracilipes and Pheidole megacephala were detected at two and seven sites, respectively. Both of these species largely excluded all other ants from bait, although their impact on ant community composition is unclear. A suite of habitat variables measured at each site was assessed to explain park-wide ant distributions. Of eight variables evaluated, only elevation was associated with ant community structure, as the ratio of native to exotic ant species increased significantly with elevation on Tutuila. Our survey documented two species not previously reported from American Samoa. Strumigenys eggersi, detected at 12 sites, appears to be a new immigrant to the Pacific Basin. A species of Pheidole was collected that likely represents an undescribed species. Solenopsis geminata, an aggressive species first reported on Tutuila in 2002, was not detected during our survey.

America Samoa↗

An overview of the LANDFIRE Prototype Project

This chapter describes the background and design of the Landscape Fire and Resource Management Planning Tools Prototype Project, or LANDFIRE Prototype Project, which was a sub-regional, proof-of-concept effort designed to develop methods and applications for providing the high-resolution data (30-m pixel) needed to support wildland fire management and to implement the National Fire Plan and Healthy Forests Restoration Act. In addition, this chapter provides synopses of the many interrelated procedures necessary for development of the 24 LANDFIRE Prototype products (see table 1 and appendix 2-A). Throughout this chapter, direction is provided for where, in this report and elsewhere, additional detailed information is available.

General Technical Report↗

Field techniques for the determination of algal pigment fluorescence in environmental waters—Principles and guidelines for instrument and sensor selection, operation, quality assurance, and data reporting

The use of algal fluorometers by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has become increasingly common. The basic principles of algal fluorescence, instrument calibration, interferences, data quantification, data interpretation, and quality control are given in Hambrook Berkman and Canova (2007). Much of the guidance given for instrument maintenance, data storage, and quality assurance in Wagner and others (2006) are also applicable to algal fluorometers, although they are not explicitly discussed. Algal fluorometers have advanced substantially since these guidance documents were published; so that while the basic principles remain unchanged, new guidance is needed. This techniques and methods report is intended to provide additional information on algal fluorescence-sensor calibration, maintenance, measurement, data storage, and quality assurance that meet stated objectives of USGS data-collection efforts. The operations described facilitate and standardize the collection and accurate communication of algal fluorescence data collected by the USGS across studies, sites, and instrument types. This report provides technical background information on algal fluorescence sensors; including specifications, operating principles, key features, and design elements. Maintenance and calibration protocols, quality-assurance techniques, and suggestions for data reporting are presented. Sensor performance issues, common interferences, and strategies for addressing them are also described.

Techniques and Methods↗

Roadside rights-of-way as pollinator habitat: A literature review

Pollination of crops and naturally - occurring flowering plants is a critical ecosystem service provided by managed and unmanaged animal pollinators. Insects are the most studied pollinators, particularly managed honey bees, unmanaged wild bees, and butterflies. Bees and butterflies thrive in early - successional habitat featuring grasses, exposed soil, wildfl owers, and shrubs, which is consistently found within transportation and utility rights - of - way (ROW). However, intensive management of ROW can reduce the amount of high - quality pollinator habitat; such practices include frequent mowing, broadcast herbicide use, and planting non - native cool season grasses. Here, we review peer - reviewed academic and non - peer reviewed gray literature describing ROW management practices and their effects on pollinator populations , focusing on applications of th e se practi ces in landscapes similar to t hose found in Main e and the nor theast Unit ed States ; that is, lan dscapes that are h e avily forested and inter spersed with agriculture, develop ed areas, and wetlands . T he li terature consistently recommend s these management practices to provide pollinator habitat in ROW and promote plant and pollinator diversity and abundance : 1) Reduce mowing frequency and time mowing to pollinator activity. 2) Target herbicide applications to undesirable plant sp ecies using backpack sprayers. 3) Plant native seeds, seedlings, or shrubs, leaving some exposed soil for nesting. We considered threats to plants and pollinators associated with ROW, including traffic volume and mortality, noise, light, and air pollution, and habitat fragmentation. The literature suggests that these threats vary widely across road sizes, types, and landscape context, and the overall negative impacts do not outweigh the potential benefits of promoting pollinator habitat in ROW. Landscape co ntext also influences the composition of ROW plant and pollinator communities. In Maine, agriculture and grassland in the surrounding generally reduced bumble bee and butterfly abundance in Priority 1 ROW sites. Many state Departments of Transportation ha ve incorporated integrative vegetation management (IVM) principles into ROW management, and we summarize a number of case studies here. Restoration projects in high - visibility areas are common; further, these can lead to public support for additional polli nator habitat enhancement. Implementing new management practices can be difficult, therefore we discuss strategies to aid in successful adoption, including gathering public support, collaborations between public and private agencies, and innovative funding opportunities. While assessing vegetation management impacts on bee and butterfly communities in ROW is a rapidly expanding area of research, there are still many gaps in current knowledge. We conclude this report by addressing these gaps and provide sugg estions for further study.

Maine↗

Prevention, early detection and containment of invasive, nonnative plants in the Hawaiian Islands: current efforts and needs

Introduction: Invasive, non-native plants (or environmental weeds) have long been recognized as a major threat to the native biodiversity of oceanic islands (Cronk & Fuller, 1995; Denslow, 2003). Globally, several hundred non-native plant species have been reported to have major impacts on natural areas on oceanic islands (Kueffer et al ., 2009). In Hawaii, at least some 50 non-native plant species reach dominance in natural areas (Kueffer et al ., 2009) and many of them are known to impact ecosystem processes or biodiversity. One example is the invasive Australian tree fern ( Cyathea cooperi ), which has been shown to be very efficient at utilizing soil nitrogen and can grow six times as rapidly in height, maintain four times more fronds, and produce significantly more fertile fronds per month than the native Hawaiian endemic tree ferns, Cibotium spp. (Durand & Goldstein, 2001a, b). Additionally, while native tree ferns provide an ideal substrate for epiphytic growth of many understory ferns and flowering plants, the Australian tree fern has the effect of impoverishing the understory and failing to support an abundance of native epiphytes (Medeiros & Loope, 1993). Other notorious examples of invasive plant species problematic for biodiversity and ecosystem processes in Hawaii include miconia ( Miconia calvescens ), strawberry guava ( Psidium cattleianum ), albizia ( Falcataria moluccana ), firetree ( Morella faya ), clidemia ( Clidemia hirta ), kahili ginger ( Hedychium gardnerianum ), and fountain grass ( Pennisetum setaceum ), to name just a few. Fireweed ( Senecio madagascariensis ) is a recent example of a seriously problematic invasive species for Hawaii&rsquo;s agriculture and is damaging certain high-elevations native ecosystems as well. The threat of invasive plants has long been recognized in Hawaii and is well documented (e.g. Cox, 1999; Loope & Kraus, 2009 in press; Loope et al ., 2004; Mooney & Drake, 1986; Stone & Scott, 1985; Stone et al. , 1992). In many respects, Hawaii may be near the forefront among national and international efforts to address the burgeoning threat of invasive plants, perhaps especially in the field of outreach and education (Holt, 1996; Van Driesche & Van Driesche, 2000). However, given the scale of the problem many challenges still need to be addressed and gaps in the existing management system need to be identified. In particular, it appears that new non-native plant species are still introduced to the Hawaiian Islands at a high rate with little or no regard for their potential invasiveness. In fact, a Pacific-wide and a global survey of non-native plants on oceanic islands have both shown that on Hawaii among all archipelagos by far the highest number of problematic invasive species known from other areas in the world is already present (Denslow et al . 2009, Kueffer et al . 2009). Hawaii lacks an effective mechanism for tracking what species are present or incoming. For instance, early detection nursery surveys conducted on Maui in 2008 found over 300 species of cultivated vascular plants that have not previously been recorded in Hawaii (Starr et al. , in prep.). In spite of an innovative Hawaii Biological Survey (e.g. Eldredge & Evenhuis, 2003), there is no mechanism for recording presence of a species until it becomes naturalized. Some of these new introductions may quickly become serious pests. Fireweed, first recorded in Hawaii on the Big Island in the early 1980s, is now considered one of the Kueffer & Loope 2009 5/48 worst weeds of pastures and is also invading natural areas from near sea level to above 10,000 feet. Although the cultivated and as yet non-invasive Cortaderia selloana has been present in Hawaii for 50 years or more, the morphologically similar Cortaderia jubata was simultaneously found to be present on Maui and invading on a large scale in 1989. It played an important role in inspiring the establishment of the Maui Invasive Species Committee (MISC) in 1997, and MISC now spends roughly $200,000 per year removing and containing C. jubata to keep it from becoming widespread in high elevation conservation lands of East and West Maui. The existence of many similar examples shows that to date regulatory action to prevent new invasive plant species from establishing and spreading in Hawaii has not yet been as successful as it needs to be. In particular, because some problematic invasive species known from other areas in the world (Kueffer et al ., 2009; Weber, 2003) have not yet been recorded from Hawaii, preventive measures against the introduction and spread of such likely invasive species is therefore an urgent need for Hawaii. Indeed, regulation of importation and early detection and eradication of introduced species before they become abundant and widespread are widely considered the most cost-efficient and often only effective measures against the threat of new invasive species (Kueffer & Hirsch Hadorn, 2008; Wittenberg & Cock, 2001). Timing seems favorable for Hawaii to achieve effective protection against the threat of new invasive species through prevention, early detection, and eradication/containment. Through the establishment and evolution of Invasive Species Committees (ISCs) on each major Hawaiian island, the institutional capacity has been built up for prevention, early detection, containment, and outreach at an island scale. Weed risk assessment (Daehler et al ., 2004) and early detection methodologies (Starr et al. , in review-a, b) have been developed and tested specifically for Hawaii. Containment strategies have been successful (e.g., Special Ecological Areas in Hawaii Volcanoes National Park), and so have eradications of particular species on an island scale (e.g. mullein ( Verbascum thapsus ) and other species on Maui, fireweed ( Senecio madagascariensis ) on Kauai). These successful management strategies may be further strengthened through recently developed novel approaches in research (e.g. remote sensing, species distribution modelling, and molecular genetics tools). Another major recent achievement is the gained support of the plant industry for preventive measures against invasive species (see p. 13ff). Last but not least, regulatory action is also moving forward. Passage of House Bill 2517 by the 2008 Hawaii House and Senate and prompt signing of the bill into law by the Governor provides hope that action to ban the sale of a meaningful suite of restricted weeds can quickly proceed through the rulemaking phase into the implementation phase. This report documents these achievements and experiences and provides a range of perspectives on how to further develop prevention, early detection and containment of invasive species in Hawaii. The report is based on a symposium and workshop held at the 2008 Hawaii Conservation Conference in Honolulu on 31 July 2008.

Hawaii↗