SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Natural Science”

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 253 records · Page 14Linked to original sources

USGS1988

Water-resources activities of the U.S. Geological Survey in Texas– Fiscal year 1987

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) was established by an act of Congress on March 3, 1879, to provide a permanent Federal agency to conduct the systematic and scientific classification of the public lands and to examine the geological structure, mineral resources, and products of national domain. An integral part of that original mission includes publishing and disseminating the earth science information needed to understand, to plan the use of, and to manage the Nation's energy, land, mineral, and water resources. Since 1879, the research and fact-finding role of the USGS has grown and been modified to meet the changing needs of the Nation it serves. As part of that evolution, the USGS has become the Federal Government's largest earthscience research agency, the Nation's largest civilian mapmaking agency, the primary source of data on the Nation's surface- and ground-water resources, and the employer of the largest number of professional earth scientists. Today's programs serve a diversity of needs and users. Programs include: Conducting detailed assessments of the energy and mineral potential of the Nation's land and offshore areas. Investigating and issuing warnings of earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, landslides, and other geologic and hydrologic hazards. Conducting research on the geologic structure of the Nation. Studying the geologic features, structure, processes, and history of the other planets of our solar system. Conducting topographic surveys of the Nation and preparing topographic and thematic maps and related cartographic products. Developing and producing digital cartographic data bases and products. Collecting data on a routine basis to determine the quantity, quality, and use of surface and ground water. Conducting water-resources appraisals in order to describe the consequences of alternative plans for developing land and water resources. Conducting research in hydraulics and hydrology and coordinating all Federal water-data acquisition. Using remotely sensed data to develop new cartographic, geologic, and hydrologic research techniques for natural resources planning and management. Providing earth-science information through an extensive publications program and a network of public access points. Along with its continuing commitment to meet the growing and changing earthscience information needs of the Nation, the USGS remains dedicated to its original mission to collect, analyze, interpret, publish, and disseminate information about the natural resources of the Nation providing "earth science in the public service."

Texas↗

USGS2023

The benefits of big-team science for conservation: Lessons learned from trinational monarch butterfly collaborations

Many pressing conservation issues are complex problems caused by multiple social and environmental drivers; their resolution is aided by interdisciplinary teams of scientists, decision makers, and stakeholders working together. In these situations, how do we generate science to effectively guide conservation (resource management and policy) decisions? This paper describes elements of successful big-team science in conservation, as well as shortcomings and lessons learned, based on our work with the monarch butterfly ( Danaus plexippus ) in North America. We summarize literature on effective science teams, extracting information about elements of success, effective implementation approaches, and barriers or pitfalls. We then describe recent and ongoing conservation science for the monarch butterfly in North America. We focus primarily on the activities of the Monarch Conservation Science Partnership–an international collaboration of interdisciplinary scientists, policy experts and natural resource managers spanning government, non-governmental and academic institutions—which developed science to inform imperilment status, recovery options, and monitoring strategies. We couch these science efforts in the adaptative management framework of Strategic Habitat Conservation, the business model for conservation employed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service to inform decision-making needs identified by stakeholders from Canada, the United States, and Mexico. We conclude with elements critical to effective big-team conservation science, discuss why science teams focused on applied conservation problems are unique relative to science teams focusing on traditional or theoretical research, and list benefits of big team science in conservation.

Frontiers in Environmental Science↗

USGS2002

Understanding arid environments using fossil rodent middens

American rodent middens have made a more dramatic contribution to understanding past environments and the development of ecological theory than Australian rodent middens. This relates to differences in the natural environment, the landscape histories, the scale and scientific approaches of the researchers. The comparison demonstrates: the power of synoptic perspectives; the value of thorough macrofossil identification in midden analysis and its potential advance in Australia where pollen has dominated analyses, the value of herbaria and reference collections; the potential of environmental databases; the importance of scientific history and 'critical research mass' and; finally, the opportunistic nature of palaeoecological research. ?? 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd.

Journal of Arid Environments↗

USGS2023

Capturing patterns of evolutionary relatedness with reflectance spectra to model and monitor biodiversity

Biogeographic history can set initial conditions for vegetation community assemblages that determine their climate responses at broad extents that land surface models attempt to forecast. Numerous studies have indicated that evolutionarily conserved biochemical, structural, and other functional attributes of plant species are captured in visible-to-short wavelength infrared, 400 to 2,500 nm, reflectance properties of vegetation. Here, we present a remotely sensed phylogenetic clustering and an evolutionary framework to accommodate spectra, distributions, and traits. Spectral properties evolutionarily conserved in plants provide the opportunity to spatially aggregate species into lineages (interpreted as “lineage functional types” or LFT) with improved classification accuracy. In this study, we use Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer data from the 2013 Hyperspectral Infrared Imager campaign over the southern Sierra Nevada, California flight box, to investigate the potential for incorporating evolutionary thinking into landcover classification. We link the airborne hyperspectral data with vegetation plot data from 1372 surveys and a phylogeny representing 1,572 species. Despite temporal and spatial differences in our training data, we classified plant lineages with moderate reliability (Kappa = 0.76) and overall classification accuracy of 80.9%. We present an assessment of classification error and detail study limitations to facilitate future LFT development. This work demonstrates that lineage-based methods may be a promising way to leverage the new-generation high-resolution and high return-interval hyperspectral data planned for the forthcoming satellite missions with sparsely sampled existing ground-based ecological data.

Proceedings of the Natural Academy of Sciences↗

USGS2014

Geospatial considerations for a multiorganizational, landscape-scale program

Geospatial data play an increasingly important role in natural resources management, conservation, and science-based projects. The management and effective use of spatial data becomes significantly more complex when the efforts involve a myriad of landscape-scale projects combined with a multiorganizational collaboration. There is sparse literature to guide users on this daunting subject; therefore, we present a framework of considerations for working with geospatial data that will provide direction to data stewards, scientists, collaborators, and managers for developing geospatial management plans. The concepts we present apply to a variety of geospatial programs or projects, which we describe as a “scalable framework” of processes for integrating geospatial efforts with management, science, and conservation initiatives. Our framework includes five tenets of geospatial data management: (1) the importance of investing in data management and standardization, (2) the scalability of content/efforts addressed in geospatial management plans, (3) the lifecycle of a geospatial effort, (4) a framework for the integration of geographic information systems (GIS) in a landscape-scale conservation or management program, and (5) the major geospatial considerations prior to data acquisition. We conclude with a discussion of future considerations and challenges.

Journal of Map & Geography Libraries↗

USGS1998

The US federal framework for research on endocrine disrupters and an analysis of research programs supported during fiscal year 1996

The potential health and ecological effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals has become a high visibility environmental issue. The 1990s have witnessed a growing concern, both on the part of the scientific community and the public, that environmental chemicals may be causing widespread effects in humans and in a variety of fish and wildlife species. This growing concern led the Committee on the Environment and Natural Resources (CENR) of the National Science and Technology Council to identify the endocrine disruptor issue as a major research initiative in early 1995 and subsequently establish an ad hoc Working Group on Endocrine Disruptors. The objectives of the working group are to 1) develop a planning framework for federal research related to human and ecological health effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals; 2) conduct an inventory of ongoing federal research programs; and 3) identify research gaps and develop a coordinated interagency plan to address priority research needs. This communication summarizes the activities of the federal government in defining a common framework for planning an endocrine disruptor research program and in assessing the status of the current effort. After developing the research framework and compiling an inventory of active research projects supported by the federal government in fiscal year 1996, the CENR working group evaluated the current federal effort by comparing the ongoing activities with the research needs identified in the framework. The analysis showed that the federal government supports considerable research on human health effects, ecological effects, and exposure assessment, with a predominance of activity occurring under human health effects. The analysis also indicates that studies on reproductive development and carcinogenesis are more prevalent than studies on neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity, that mammals (mostly laboratory animals) are the main species under study, and that chlorinated dibenzodioxins and polychlorinated biphenyls are the most commonly studied chemical classes. Comparison of the inventory with the research needs should allow identification of underrepresented research areas in need of attention.

Environmental Health Perspectives↗

USGS2012

The macroecology of sustainability

The discipline of sustainability science has emerged in response to concerns of natural and social scientists, policymakers, and lay people about whether the Earth can continue to support human population growth and economic prosperity. Yet, sustainability science has developed largely independently from and with little reference to key ecological principles that govern life on Earth. A macroecological perspective highlights three principles that should be integral to sustainability science: 1) physical conservation laws govern the flows of energy and materials between human systems and the environment, 2) smaller systems are connected by these flows to larger systems in which they are embedded, and 3) global constraints ultimately limit flows at smaller scales. Over the past few decades, decreasing per capita rates of consumption of petroleum, phosphate, agricultural land, fresh water, fish, and wood indicate that the growing human population has surpassed the capacity of the Earth to supply enough of these essential resources to sustain even the current population and level of socioeconomic development.

PLoS Biology↗

USGS1993

Identification of requirements and sources for global digital topographic data

Many of the physical processes being studied by global change researchers are affects by land surface topography and consequently topographic data are an important requirement for these investigations. Remotely sensed data, especially those that will be collected by the instruments of the Earth Observing System, require significant correction to remove topographic effects. Although some requirements are met by existing topographic data, there are serious data shortages that will affect global change science. The interdisciplinary and multi temporal natural of global change research requires that remotely sensed data be processed using a consistent, highly accurate global topographic database so that information extracted from these data for different areas and times can be compared quantitively. Cartographic and remote sensing sources for the generation of new topographic data exist or are planned and will be helpful for fulfilling these requirements. More consistent use of accuracy statement terminology by data users and producers is necessary to better compare the requirements with existing or future data sets.

Pecora 12 Symposium↗

USGS2000

Evidence for Paleocene dinosaurs in the Ojo Alamo Sandstone, San Juan Basin, New Mexico

Dinosaur fossils from the Ojo Alamo Sandstone, San Juan Basin, New Mexico, have been a puzzle to geologists for decades because other stratigraphic and paleontologic evidence indicates that this formation is Paleocene in age. The Paleocene age of the Ojo Alamo is based on the following evidence: (1) the lowermost part of the Nacimiento Formation, which conformably overlies and intertongues with the Ojo Alamo Sandstone in the Ojo Alamo type area in the southern part of the basin, contains Paleocene (Puercan) mammalian fossils; (2) plant megafossils collected from the Ojo Alamo indicate a Tertiary age for this rock unit; (3) pollen-productive rock samples collected from the Ojo Alamo at several localities in the basin have, without exception, yielded Paleocene-age palynomorph assemblages, and conversely, no Cretaceous pollen has ever been reported from Ojo Alamo rock samples. We report here the first discovery of Paleocene palynomorphs from Ojo Alamo Sandstone outcrops in the northern San Juan Basin. The pollen-producing rock samples were collected from a coaly, carbonaceous shale bed 12-m above the base of the Ojo Alamo and 3-m below the level of a large hadrosaur femur (1310-mm long and weighing about 130 kg) collected from this site. The bone was recovered from a cobble-to-boulder conglomeratic sandstone but shows no evidence of abrasion by erosion indicating almost instant burial after death of the animal and early mineralization of the femur. It is our opinion that this bone was not reworked from underlying Cretaceous strata. The data from the San Juan River site indicate that dinosaurs did not die out at the end of the Cretaceous in the San Juan Basin, but lived on for as much as a few hundred thousand years into the Paleocene before finally becoming extinct.

New Mexico↗

USGS2014

Methane hydrates in nature - Current knowledge and challenges

Recognizing the importance of methane hydrate research and the need for a coordinated effort, the United States Congress enacted the Methane Hydrate Research and Development Act of 2000. At the same time, the Ministry of International Trade and Industry in Japan launched a research program to develop plans for a methane hydrate exploratory drilling project in the Nankai Trough. India, China, the Republic of Korea, and other nations also have established large methane hydrate research and development programs. Government-funded scientific research drilling expeditions and production test studies have provided a wealth of information on the occurrence of methane hydrates in nature. Numerous studies have shown that the amount of gas stored as methane hydrates in the world may exceed the volume of known organic carbon sources. However, methane hydrates represent both a scientific and technical challenge, and much remains to be learned about their characteristics and occurrence in nature. Methane hydrate research in recent years has mostly focused on: (1) documenting the geologic parameters that control the occurrence and stability of methane hydrates in nature, (2) assessing the volume of natural gas stored within various methane hydrate accumulations, (3) analyzing the production response and characteristics of methane hydrates, (4) identifying and predicting natural and induced environmental and climate impacts of natural methane hydrates, (5) analyzing the methane hydrate role as a geohazard, (6) establishing the means to detect and characterize methane hydrate accumulations using geologic and geophysical data, and (7) establishing the thermodynamic phase equilibrium properties of methane hydrates as a function of temperature, pressure, and gas composition. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the Consortium for Ocean Leadership (COL) combined their efforts in 2012 to assess the contributions that scientific drilling has made and could continue to make to advance our understanding of methane hydrates in nature. COL assembled a Methane Hydrate Project Science Team with members from academia, industry, and government. This Science Team worked with COL and DOE to develop and host the Methane Hydrate Community Workshop, which surveyed a substantial cross section of the methane hydrate research community for input on the most important research developments in our understanding of methane hydrates in nature and their potential role as an energy resource, a geohazard, and/or as an agent of global climate change. Our understanding of how methane hydrates occur in nature is still growing and evolving, and it is known with certainty that field, laboratory, and modeling studies have contributed greatly to our understanding of hydrates in nature and will continue to be a critical source of the information needed to advance our understanding of methane hydrates.

Journal of Chemical and Engineering Data↗

USGS2016

Get your science used—Six guidelines to improve your products

Introduction Natural scientists, like many other experts, face challenges when communicating to people outside their fields of expertise. This is especially true when they try to communicate to those whose background, knowledge, and experience are far distant from that field of expertise. At a recent workshop, experts in risk communication offered insights into the communication challenges of probabilistic hazard products, suggested tips, and shared their strategies for making products that a targeted audience can understand and use. Although the workshop was held to broaden the understanding and use of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Maps (NSHM), the workshop outcomes presented in this report can benefit anyone who develops products based on technical information. On the basis of research and practice into how people think, use tools, make decisions, and understand scientific/technical information, the social and behavioral scientists, marketers, and social-impact designers at the NSHM workshop provided remarkably consistent guidelines to develop successful science products, such as text, maps, and other products. In this report the guidelines are numbered for clarity, but they can be applied repeatedly, piecemeal, or out of order to fit each project and your resources.

Circular↗

USGS2025

U.S. Geological Survey Pollinator Science Strategy, 2025–35—A Review and Look Forward

This “U.S. Geological Survey Pollinator Science Strategy, 2025–35—A Review and Look Forward” (“Pollinator Science Strategy”) describes the science vision of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to support management, conservation, and policy decisions on animal pollinators and their habitats. As the science arm of the Department of the Interior, the USGS has a primary role in providing scientific information to natural resource managers and policymakers across the United States. This “Pollinator Science Strategy” was drafted by a team of USGS pollinator researchers and was further developed through feedback from Federal, State, Tribal, nongovernmental organizations, and industry partners. This “Pollinator Science Strategy” highlights the USGS’s role in the research to promote healthy pollinator populations and address partner information gaps so they can make more informed management decisions. By outlining the importance of USGS science in addressing the information needs of other agencies, organizations, and the public, the “Pollinator Science Strategy” reaffirms the USGS’s commitment to pollinator research and showcases our research priorities for 2025–35. With more than 300 research centers nationally, the USGS is equipped to address pollinator science across scales of complexity and geographic range. USGS pollinator science is organized according to the following five thematic areas: Assessing species ecology, distributions, and natural history requirements. Tracking species status and trends. Understanding species threats and stressors. Informing restoration and management actions. Developing novel methods for improving pollinator research, monitoring, and population outcomes that can benefit our Nation. Our pollinator information products and associated data are made widely available to the public to ensure scientific transparency and accessibility. This “Pollinator Science Strategy” concludes with several research goals that the USGS will work towards from 2025 to 2035, representing our vision for USGS science. These research goals include synthesizing and modernizing the latest information on pollinator threats, developing research that assists managers with habitat design and restoration, providing training to partners on native bee identification and monitoring design, and developing new technologies for assessing the status and trends of our nation’s pollinators.

Circular↗

USGS2019

Nutrients in northern Missouri streams

Nutrients, specifically nitrogen and phosphorus, are necessary for healthy aquatic communities to thrive, but if nutrient concentrations are too high, water quality can be degraded and natural aquatic communities may be destroyed. Nutrients consistently have been listed nationally as one of the top five causes of stream and river impairments, and agriculture consistently has been identified as the leading known source. The Mississippi River watershed was identified as a top priority for nutrient reductions because of the predominant agricultural land use, the associated harmful effects of nutrient loading on local water bodies, and the resulting annual midsummer northern Gulf of Mexico hypoxic “dead” zone. In 2010, the Natural Resources Conservation Service started the Mississippi River Basin Healthy Watersheds Initiative, which offers financial and technical assistance for voluntary conservation practices on agricultural lands. The intention is to reduce nutrient and sediment export to waterways within the Mississippi River watershed. The U.S. Geological Survey Missouri Water Science Center and the Missouri Department of Natural Resources began a cooperative study in 2010 to compare temporal changes in total nitrogen and total phosphorus concentrations in the Lower Grand River. Despite increases in conservation practice funding from the Mississippi River Basin Healthy Watersheds Initiative during 2011–15 for the Lower Grand River, decreases in flow-normalized total nitrogen and total phosphorus concentrations during this same period at the Grand River site were less than at the other long-term Missouri River tributary sites that did not receive additional funding. The flow-normalized total nitrogen and total phosphorus concentrations at the three long-term Missouri River tributary sites were related to the amount of agricultural land use within their watersheds and livestock manure may be a substantial source of stream nitrogen. Monthly total nitrogen and total phosphorus concentrations within the Lower Grand River increased with increased streamflow, indicating that the major sources of nitrogen and phosphorus are runoff or nutrients that are stored in soils within the streambank that mobilize during higher streamflows. Programs such as the Mississippi River Basin Healthy Watersheds Initiative are intended to encourage voluntary agricultural conservation practices to enhance soil health and reduce nutrient export to streams.

Missouri↗

USGS2023

The EDMAP Program: Training the next generation of geologic mappers

Introduction Detailed geologic maps are the basis of most earth science investigations and can be used for natural hazard mitigation, resource identification and exploration, infrastructure planning, and more. As a part of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) congressionally mandated National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program (NCGMP), the EDMAP program (referred to as EDMAP) is a partnership between the USGS and participating colleges and universities that provides mentorship and training opportunities for earth science students nationwide. EDMAP supports graduate students and upper-level undergraduate students—under the guidance of a faculty member who serves as a “principal investigator”—for the training of students to become geologic mappers. Between 1996 and 2021, EDMAP funded geologic mapping educational experiences and training for 1,373 students at more than 170 universities.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2017

The Wetland and Aquatic Research Center strategic science plan

Introduction The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Wetland and Aquatic Research Center (WARC) has two primary locations (Gainesville, Florida, and Lafayette, Louisiana) and field stations throughout the southeastern United States and Caribbean. WARC’s roots are in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Park Service research units that were brought into the USGS as the Biological Research Division in 1996. Founded in 2015, WARC was created from the merger of two long-standing USGS biology science Centers—the Southeast Ecological Science Center and the National Wetlands Research Center—to bring together expertise in biology, ecology, landscape science, geospatial applications, and decision support in order to address issues nationally and internationally. WARC scientists apply their expertise to a variety of wetland and aquatic research and monitoring issues that require coordinated, integrated efforts to better understand natural environments. By increasing basic understanding of the biology of important species and broader ecological and physiological processes, this research provides information to policymakers and aids managers in their stewardship of natural resources and in regulatory functions. This strategic science plan (SSP) was developed to guide WARC research during the next 5–10 years in support of Department of the Interior (DOI) partnering bureaus such as the USFWS, the National Park Service, and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, as well as other Federal, State, and local natural resource management agencies. The SSP demonstrates the alignment of the WARC goals with the USGS mission areas, associated programs, and other DOI initiatives. The SSP is necessary for workforce planning and, as such, will be used as a guide for future needs for personnel. The SSP also will be instrumental in developing internal funding priorities and in promoting WARC’s capabilities to both external cooperators and other groups within the USGS.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2011

Overview of the ARkStorm scenario

The U.S. Geological Survey, Multi Hazards Demonstration Project (MHDP) uses hazards science to improve resiliency of communities to natural disasters including earthquakes, tsunamis, wildfires, landslides, floods and coastal erosion. The project engages emergency planners, businesses, universities, government agencies, and others in preparing for major natural disasters. The project also helps to set research goals and provides decision-making information for loss reduction and improved resiliency. The first public product of the MHDP was the ShakeOut Earthquake Scenario published in May 2008. This detailed depiction of a hypothetical magnitude 7.8 earthquake on the San Andreas Fault in southern California served as the centerpiece of the largest earthquake drill in United States history, involving over 5,000 emergency responders and the participation of over 5.5 million citizens. This document summarizes the next major public project for MHDP, a winter storm scenario called ARkStorm (for Atmospheric River 1,000). Experts have designed a large, scientifically realistic meteorological event followed by an examination of the secondary hazards (for example, landslides and flooding), physical damages to the built environment, and social and economic consequences. The hypothetical storm depicted here would strike the U.S. West Coast and be similar to the intense California winter storms of 1861 and 1862 that left the central valley of California impassible. The storm is estimated to produce precipitation that in many places exceeds levels only experienced on average once every 500 to 1,000 years. Extensive flooding results. In many cases flooding overwhelms the state’s flood-protection system, which is typically designed to resist 100- to 200-year runoffs. The Central Valley experiences hypothetical flooding 300 miles long and 20 or more miles wide. Serious flooding also occurs in Orange County, Los Angeles County, San Diego, the San Francisco Bay area, and other coastal communities. Windspeeds in some places reach 125 miles per hour, hurricane-force winds. Across wider areas of the state, winds reach 60 miles per hour. Hundreds of landslides damage roads, highways, and homes. Property damage exceeds $ 300 billion, most from flooding. Demand surge (an increase in labor rates and other repair costs after major natural disasters) could increase property losses by 20 percent. Agricultural losses and other costs to repair lifelines, dewater (drain) flooded islands, and repair damage from landslides, brings the total direct property loss to nearly $ 400 billion, of which $ 20 to $ 30 billion would be recoverable through public and commercial insurance. Power, water, sewer, and other lifelines experience damage that takes weeks or months to restore. Flooding evacuation could involve 1.5 million residents in the inland region and delta counties. Business interruption costs reach $ 325 billion in addition to the $ 400 billion property repair costs, meaning that an ARkStorm could cost on the order of $ 725 billion, which is nearly 3 times the loss deemed to be realistic by the ShakeOut authors for a severe southern California earthquake, an event with roughly the same annual occurrence probability. The ARkStorm has several public policy implications: (1) An ARkStorm raises serious questions about the ability of existing federal, state, and local disaster planning to handle a disaster of this magnitude. (2) A core policy issue raised is whether to pay now to mitigate, or pay a lot more later for recovery. (3) Innovative financing solutions are likely to be needed to avoid fiscal crisis and adequately fund response and recovery costs from a similar, real, disaster. (4) Responders and government managers at all levels could be encouraged to conduct risk assessments, and devise the full spectrum of exercises, to exercise ability of their plans to address a similar event. (5) ARkStorm can be a reference point for application of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and California Emergency Management Agency guidance connecting federal, state and local natural hazards mapping and mitigation planning under the National Flood Insurance Plan and Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. (6) Common messages to educate the public about the risk of such an extreme disaster as the ARkStorm scenario could be developed and consistently communicated to facilitate policy formulation and transformation. These impacts were estimated by a team of 117 scientists, engineers, public-policy experts, insurance experts, and employees of the affected lifelines. In many aspects the ARkStorm produced new science, such as the model of coastal inundation. The products of the ARkStorm are intended for use by emergency planners, utility operators, policymakers, and others to inform preparedness plans and to enhance resiliency.

California↗

USGS2006

Natural history, field ecology, conservation biology and wildlife management: Time to connect the dots

Natural history and field ecology are essential building blocks for successful conservation and management of herpetofauna. Thus, natural history and field ecology merit major infusions of funding and increased recognition of their importance in science and management. Others have stated matters well: (1) Academic training in natural history should receive high priority; (2) we need to integrate our work across disciplines (from molecules to communities), and use all of our knowledge toward common goals; (3) natural history is not dead but today is a flourishing enterprise; and (4) mutual respect and collaboration between disciplines best serve our own mental health as well as the future of natural history. We need to merge the best natural history, field ecological data, and biological questions with the latest advances in other fields of inquiry if we are to advance science and solve key environmental issues. It takes a scientific community and many concerned parties to save a species, let alone an ecosystem. We must connect these dots to see the big picture.

Herpetological Conservation and Biology↗

USGS2013

Resilience thinking and a decision-analytic approach to conservation: strange bedfellows or essential partners?

There has been some tendency to view decision science and resilience theory as opposing approaches, or at least as contending perspectives, for natural resource management. Resilience proponents have been especially critical of optimization in decision science, at least for those cases where it is focused on the aggressive pursuit of efficiency. In general, optimization of resource systems is held to reduce spatial, temporal, or organizational heterogeneity that would otherwise limit efficiency, leading to homogenization of a system and making it less able to cope with unexpected changes or disturbances. For their part, decision analysts have been critical of resilience proponents for not providing much practical advice to decision makers. We believe a key source of tension between resilience thinking and application of decision science is the pursuit of efficiency in the latter (i.e., choosing the “best” management action or strategy option to maximize productivity of one or few resource components), vs. a desire in the former to keep options open (i.e., maintaining and enhancing diversity). It seems obvious, however, that with managed natural systems, there must be a principle by which to guide decision making, which at a minimumallows for a comparison of projected outcomes associated with decision alternatives. This is true even if the primary concern of decision making is the preservation of system resilience. We describe how a careful framing of conservation problems, especially in terms of management objectives and predictive models, can help reduce the purported tension between resiliencethinking and decision analysis. In particular, objective setting in conservation problems needs to be more attuned to the dynamics of ecological systems and to the possibility of deep uncertainties that underlie the risk of unintended, if not irreversible, outcomes. Resilience thinking also leads to the suggestion that model development should focus more on process rather than pattern, on multiple scales of influence, and on phenomena that can create alternative stability regimes. Although we acknowledge the inherent difficulties in modeling ecological processes, we stress that formulation of useful models need not depend on a thorough mechanistic understanding or precise parameterization, assuming that uncertainty is acknowledged and treated in a systematic manner.

Ecology and Society↗