USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Surveying and Land Information Science”

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 253 records · Page 14Linked to original sources
USGS2013

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

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

Open-File Report↗
USGS2026

ECCOE Landsat quarterly calibration and validation report—Quarter 4, 2025

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey Earth Resources Observation and Science Calibration and Validation (Cal/Val) Center of Excellence (ECCOE) focuses on improving the accuracy, precision, calibration, and product quality of remote-sensing data, leveraging years of multiscale optical system geometric and radiometric calibration and characterization experience. The ECCOE Landsat Cal/Val Team continually monitors the geometric and radiometric performance of active Landsat missions and makes calibration adjustments, as needed, to maintain data quality at the highest level. This report provides observed geometric and radiometric analysis results for Landsats 8 and 9 for quarter 4 (October–December) of 2025. All data used to compile the Cal/Val analysis results presented in this report are freely available from the U.S. Geological Survey EarthExplorer website: https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov . One specific activity that the ECCOE Landsat Cal/Val Team closely monitored was a Landsat 9 safehold anomaly. On October 17, 2025, Landsat 9 experienced a Solar Array Drive Assembly potentiometer fault. The onboard fault response put both the Operational Land Imager sensor and the Thermal Infrared Sensor into safe mode. Additionally, the Thermal Infrared Sensor focal plane assembly was turned off, but the cryocooler remained on. On October 20, 2025, the Solar Array Drive Assembly recovery commanding was successfully performed to put the spacecraft into nadir viewing mode. The following day, Operational Land Imager activation and recovery started, including focal plane assembly warmup. After reaching nominal operational temperatures and achieving thermal stability, science imaging resumed on October 23, 2025. Additional information about the Landsat 9 safehold anomaly is here: https://www.usgs.gov/landsat-missions/news/landsat-9-returns-normal-operations-following-brief-safehold .

Open-File Report↗
USGS2017

National Park Service Vegetation Mapping Inventory Program: Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve Vegetation Mapping Project

The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate comprehensive information and analysis about natural resources and related topics concerning lands managed by the National Park Service. The series supports the advancement of science, informed decision-making, and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series also provides a forum for presenting lengthier results that may not be accepted by publications with page limitations. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. This report received formal peer review by subject-matter experts whose background and expertise put them on par technically and scientifically with the authors of the information. The peer review was led according to the Fundamental Science Practices of the U.S. Geological Survey. Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. This report is available in digital format from the Gulf Coast Network website and the Natural Resource Publications Management website.

Louisiana↗
USGS2021

National Park Service Vegetation Mapping Inventory Program: Great Smoky Mountains National Park vegetation mapping project

The National Park Service (NPS) Vegetation Mapping Inventory (VMI) Program is an effort to classify, describe, and map existing vegetation communities in national park units throughout the United States. The NPS VMI Program is managed by the NPS Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Inventory and Monitoring Program and provides baseline vegetation information to natural resource managers, researchers, and ecologists. The U.S. Geological Survey Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center, NatureServe, and NPS Great Smoky Mountains National Park (GRSM, also referred to as the “Park”) have completed vegetation classification and mapping of GRSM, including the Foothills Parkway, for the NPS VMI Program. Mappers, ecologists, and botanists collaborated to affirm vegetation types of GRSM and to determine how best to map the vegetation types by using aerial imagery. A vegetation classification developed in 2003 by NatureServe and the NPS served as a foundation to further classify and map the vegetation types of the Park. Data from an additional 10 vegetation plots supported vegetation types either rare or not documented in the 2003 classification. Data from 203 verification sites were collected to test the field key to vegetation types and the application of vegetation types to a sample set of map polygons. Furthermore, data from 972 accuracy assessment (AA) sites were collected (of which 966 were used to test accuracy of the vegetation map layer). This GRSM vegetation mapping project identified 112 vegetation types consisting of 105 association types in the U.S. National Vegetation Classification (USNVC), 2 “park-special” types, 1 “map-special” type, and 4 cultural types in the USNVC. To map the vegetation and land cover of GRSM, 52 map classes were developed. Of these 52 map classes, 46 represent natural (including ruderal) vegetation types, most of which types are recognized in the USNVC. For the remaining 6 of the 52 map classes, 4 represent USNVC cultural types for agricultural and developed areas, and 2 represent non-USNVC types for nonvegetated open water and nonvegetated rock. Features were interpreted from viewing four-band digital aerial imagery using digital onscreen three-dimensional stereoscopic workflow systems in geographic information systems; digital aerial imagery was collected during September 23–October 30, 2015. The interpreted data were digitally and spatially referenced, thus making the spatial-database layers usable in a geographic information system. Polygon units were mapped to either a 0.5- or 0.25- hectare (ha) minimum mapping unit, depending on vegetation type. A geodatabase containing several feature-class layers and tables provides the locations and data of USNVC vegetation types (vegetation map layer), vegetation plots, verification sites, AA sites, project boundary extent, and aerial image centers and flight lines. Covering 210,875 ha, the feature-class layer and related tables for the vegetation map layer provide 34,084 polygons of detailed attribute data when special modifiers are not considered (average polygon size of 6.2 ha) and 36,589 polygons of detailed attribute data when special modifiers are considered (average polygon size of 5.8 ha). Each map polygon is assigned a map-class code and name and, when applicable, are linked to USNVC classification tables within the geodatabase. The vegetation map extent includes the administrative boundary for GRSM and the Foothills Parkway. A summary report, generated from the vegetation map layer, concludes that the 46 map classes representing natural (including ruderal) vegetation types apply to 99.2% of polygons (33,797 polygons; average size of 6.2 ha) and cover 98.6% of the Park (207,971.4 ha). Further broken down, map classes representing natural vegetation types indicate that the Park is 97.7% forest and woodland (205,882.5 ha), 0.6% shrubland (1,174.6 ha), and 0.4% herbaceous (914.3 ha). Map classes representing cultural vegetation types apply to 0.8% of polygons (259 polygons; average size of 4.9 ha) and cover 0.6% of the Park (1,277.4 ha). Map classes representing nonvegetation open and flowing water and unvegetated rock apply to 0.08% of polygons (28 polygons; average size of 58.1 ha) and cover 0.8% of the Park (1,625.9 ha). A thematic AA study was completed of map classes representing the natural (including ruderal) vegetation types of the Park. Initial AA results were discussed with NPS staff from the Park. Following input from NPS staff on how to handle map classes that fell below accuracy standards, adjustments were made to the vegetation map layer. Final results indicate an overall accuracy of 80.64% (kappa index of 79.96% for chance agreements) based on data from 966 of the 972 AA sites. Most individual map-class themes exceed the NPS VMI Program standard of 80% with a 90% confidence interval. The GRSM vegetation mapping project delivers many geospatial and vegetation data products, including an in-depth project report discussing methods and results, which includes map classification and map-class descriptions. This suite of products also includes descriptions and a field key to vegetation types; a database of vegetation plots, verification sites, and AA sites; digital images of field sites; field data sheets; digital aerial imagery; hardcopy and digital maps; a geodatabase of vegetation and land cover (map layer), field sites (vegetation plots, verification sites, and AA sites), aerial imagery index, project boundary, and metadata; and a contingency table listing AA results. Geospatial products are projected in the Universal Transverse Mercator, Zone 17 North, by using the North American Datum of 1983. Information on the NPS VMI Program and completed mapping projects are on the internet at https://www.nps.gov/im/vegetation-inventory.htm.

North Carolina, Tennessee↗
USGS2015

A survey of Bureau of Land Management employees on collaboration and alternative dispute resolution

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has been actively expanding its capacity to work cooperatively with other agencies, Tribes, the public, and other stakeholders using collaborative and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) approaches. In 1997, the BLM created the BLM’s Collaboration and Alternative Dispute Resolution Program (Collaboration/ADR Program) to centralize, strengthen, and coordinate these efforts. Specifically, the Collaboration/ADR Program is charged with developing ADR policies; ensuring that statutory and regulatory requirements are met; and providing training, resources, and direct support for collaboration and ADR in the BLM. At the request of the Collaboration/ADR Program, the Policy Analysis and Science Assistance Branch of the U.S. Geological Survey, located in the Fort Collins Science Center, conducted an online survey of BLM employees in early 2013 to address four overarching questions: What information sources and assistance resources are BLM employees currently accessing to fill their conflict/dispute resolution and collaboration needs? What are the perceived information and resource needs of BLM employees associated with conflict/dispute resolution and collaboration? What information and resources can the BLM Collaboration/ADR Program provide to fill BLM employee needs? What is the BLM employee level of knowledge associated with conflict/dispute resolution and collaboration? What are the attitudes and perceptions of BLM employees toward conflict/dispute resolution and collaboration? This report describes the findings of this online survey and will assist the BLM’s Collaboration and ADR Oversight Committee in developing the Strategic Plan for the Collaboration/ADR Program. The purpose of the Strategic Plan is to advance collaboration in the BLM and to increase the capacity of the Collaboration/ADR Program to support collaborative efforts on the ground. In March 2013, a user-specific link to the online survey was sent via email to all current BLM employees ( n = 6,734) that could potentially have had experience in collaboration and conflict resolution based on their job series. The links took the respondents to a webpage where the survey was administered. Email reminders were sent at weekly intervals thereafter. When the survey closed in May 2013, the response rate was 45 percent (3,161 employees). Of these, only 14 percent (427 respondents) indicated that they did not have direct experience with collaboration or ADR, and were unlikely to gain experience in the future. Because these respondents were not the target population of this survey, they were branched to the demographic questions at the end of the survey and were not included in any further analyses. The remaining 86 percent (2,734 respondents) indicated that either they did have direct experience with collaboration and (or) ADR, or that they might gain experience with one or both in the future. Below we highlight some of the key findings from their survey responses (refer to the Results section for a comprehensive report of the survey findings).

Open-File Report↗
USGS2011

Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative data management and integration

Six Federal agencies, two State agencies, and two local entities formally support the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative (WLCI) and work together on a landscape scale to manage fragile habitats and wildlife resources amidst growing energy development in southwest Wyoming. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) was tasked with implementing targeted research and providing scientific information about southwest Wyoming to inform the development of WLCI habitat enhancement and restoration projects conducted by land management agencies. Many WLCI researchers and decisionmakers representing the Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the State of Wyoming, and others have overwhelmingly expressed the need for a stable, robust infrastructure to promote sharing of data resources produced by multiple entities, including metadata adequately describing the datasets. Descriptive metadata facilitates use of the datasets by users unfamiliar with the data. Agency representatives advocate development of common data handling and distribution practices among WLCI partners to enhance availability of comprehensive and diverse data resources for use in scientific analyses and resource management. The USGS Core Science Informatics (CSI) team is developing and promoting data integration tools and techniques across USGS and partner entity endeavors, including a data management infrastructure to aid WLCI researchers and decisionmakers.

Wyoming↗
USGS2007

U.S. Geological Survey Activities Related to American Indians and Alaska Natives: Fiscal Year 2005

Introduction This report describes the activities that the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducted with American Indian and Alaska Native governments, educational institutions, and individuals during Federal fiscal year (FY) 2005. Most of these USGS activities were collaborations with Tribes, Tribal organizations, or professional societies. Others were conducted cooperatively with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) or other Federal entities. The USGS is the earth and natural science bureau within the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI). The USGS does not have regulatory or land management responsibilities. As described in this report, there are many USGS activities that are directly relevant to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and to Native lands. A USGS website, dedicated to making USGS more accessible to American Indians, Alaska Natives, their governments, and institutions, is available at www.usgs.gov/indian. This website includes information on how to contact USGS American Indian/Alaska Native Liaisons, training opportunities, and links to other information resources. This report and previous editions are also available through the website. The USGS realizes that Native knowledge and cultural traditions of living in harmony with nature result in unique Native perspectives that enrich USGS studies. USGS seeks to increase the sensitivity and openness of its scientists to the breadth of Native knowledge, expanding the information on which their research is based. USGS scientific studies include data collection, mapping, natural resource modeling, and research projects. These projects typically last 2 or 3 years, although some are parts of longer-term activities. Some projects are funded cooperatively, with USGS funds matched or supplemented by individual Tribal governments, or by the BIA. These projects may also receive funding from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the Indian Health Service (part of the Department of Health and Human Services), or other Federal agencies. The USGS routinely works with its sister bureaus in the Department of the Interior to provide the scientific information and expertise needed to meet the Department's science priorities. Some USGS activities described in this report are conducted as collateral tasks that result from USGS employees identifying and responding to perceived needs. These endeavors are usually prompted by employee interests and frequently involve educational activities. The education is often a reciprocal learning and teaching experience for USGS employees and for Native participants. Through these activities, USGS employees help to fulfill a mission of the USGS - to demonstrate scientific relevance - while helping their fellow citizens. Increasingly, some of the educational activities are becoming parts of formal USGS projects. USGS employees also take initiative in assisting American Indians and Alaska Natives by participating in several organizations that promote awareness of science career opportunities among Native peoples and help build support and communication networks. One such group is the American Indian Science and Engineering Society (AISES). USGS employees join this organization on a voluntary basis, bringing the benefits of this expanded network to the USGS, as many employees do with other professional organizations. The studies briefly described in this report span subsistence issues, wildlife health, water quality, mineral resources, monitoring and modeling to gather information and predict what may happen in the future. Although each project description relates to Native Americans in some way, the projects vary widely, including who conducted the work, the goals and products, the duration of the study, and whether it was local or covered a broad area. Each major organizational unit of the USGS has identified an American Indian/Alaska Native liaison. The USGS has a regional organizational structure, with Western, Central,

Circular↗
USGS2015

Evaluation and comparison of methods to estimate irrigation withdrawal for the National Water Census Focus Area Study of the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin in southwestern Georgia

Methods to estimate irrigation withdrawal using nationally available datasets and techniques that are transferable to other agricultural regions were evaluated by the U.S. Geological Survey as part of the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) River Basin focus area study of the National Water Census (ACF–FAS). These methods investigated the spatial, temporal, and quantitative distributions of water withdrawal for irrigation in the southwestern Georgia region of the ACF–FAS, filling a vital need to inform science-based decisions regarding resource management and conservation. The crop– demand method assumed that only enough water is pumped onto a crop to satisfy the deficit between evapotranspiration and precipitation. A second method applied a geostatistical regimen of variography and conditional simulation to monthly metered irrigation withdrawal to estimate irrigation withdrawal where data do not exist. A third method analyzed Landsat satellite imagery using an automated approach to generate monthly estimates of irrigated lands. These methods were evaluated independently and compared collectively with measured water withdrawal information available in the Georgia part of the ACF–FAS, principally in the Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin. An assessment of each method’s contribution to the National Water Census program was also made to identify transfer value of the methods to the national program and other water census studies. None of the three methods evaluated represent a turnkey process to estimate irrigation withdrawal on any spatial (local or regional) or temporal (monthly or annual) extent. Each method requires additional information on agricultural practices during the growing season to complete the withdrawal estimation process. Spatial and temporal limitations inherent in identifying irrigated acres during the growing season, and in designing spatially and temporally representative monitor (meter) networks, can belie the ability of the methods to produce accurate irrigation-withdrawal estimates that can be used to produce dependable and consistent assessments of water availability and use for the National Water Census. Emerging satellite-data products and techniques for data analysis can generate high spatial-resolution estimates of irrigated-acres distributions with near-term temporal frequencies compatible with the needs of the ACF–FAS and the National Water Census.

Georgia↗
USGS2017

U.S. Geological Survey—Energy and wildlife research annual report for 2017

Introduction Terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems provide valuable services to humans and are a source of clean water, energy, raw materials, and productive soils. The Nation’s food supply is more secure because of wildlife. For example, native pollinators enhance agricultural crops, and insect-eating bats provide pest control services worth billions of dollars to farmers annually. Fish and wildlife are also vital to a vibrant outdoor recreation and tourism industry. Recreational activities, such as hunting, shooting, boating, and angling, generated \$1.1 billion in excise taxes paid to State wildlife agencies in 2017. National parks, wildlife refuges, and monuments accounted for $35 billion in economic output and 318,000 jobs nationwide in 2016. Additional economic benefits are generated from the use and enjoyment of wildlife in State-owned lands and waters. Although the United States is rich in natural resources, human activity continues to place new pressures on fish and wildlife and the habitats they rely on. The United States became the world’s top producer of petroleum and natural gas products in 2012, surpassing Russia’s natural gas production levels in 2009 and Saudi Arabia’s petroleum production in 2013. The U.S. Energy Information Administration projects that the demand for liquid fuel, natural gas, and renewable energy will show strong growth in the next 20 years. Wind energy has demonstrated consistent growth since 2007 with now more than 53,000 wind turbines contributing to power grids in 41 States, Guam, and Puerto Rico. Solar energy has seen rapid growth since 2013 and made up nearly one-third of the total electricity generation additions in 2016. Yet as our Nation works to advance energy security and sustain wildlife, some conflicts have surfaced. Impacts of an expanding energy infrastructure include fragmentation and loss of habitat as well as mortality of birds, bats, fish, and other animals from interactions with energy generation facilities. Because energy development can often occur in wildlife habitats, ecological science can help guide project siting and operational decisions to areas that present the lowest risk to wildlife and energy developers. To address these challenges and make the most of new opportunities, the U.S. Geological Survey is producing innovative science to develop workable solutions that can help sustain wildlife and the habitat they rely upon, while allowing informed development.

Circular↗
USGS2003

Geographic analysis and monitoring at the United States Geological Survey

The Geographic Analysis and Monitoring (GAM) Program of the U.S. Geological Survey assesses the Nation's land surface at a variety of spatial and temporal scales to understand the rates, causes, and consequences of natural and human-induced processes and their interactions that affect the landscape over time. The program plays an important role in developing National Map tools and application. The GAM is a science and synthesis program that not only assesses the rates of changes to the Earth's land surface, but also provides reports on the status and trends of the Nation's land resources on a periodic basis, produces a land-use and land- cover database for the periodically updated map and data set-the Geographic Face of the Nation, and conducts research leading to improved understanding and knowledge about geographic processes. Scientific investigations provide comprehensive information needed to understand the environmental, resource, and economic consequences of landscape change. These analyses responds to the needs of resource managers and offers the American public baseline information to help them understand the dynamic nature of our national landscape and to anticipate the opportunities and consequences of our actions.

Cartography and Geographic Information Science↗
USGS2012

An economic value of remote-sensing information—Application to agricultural production and maintaining groundwater quality

Does remote-sensing information provide economic benefits to society, and can a value be assigned to those benefits? Can resource management and policy decisions be better informed by coupling past and present Earth observations with groundwater nitrate measurements? Using an integrated assessment approach, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) applied an established conceptual framework to answer these questions, as well as to estimate the value of information (VOI) for remote-sensing imagery. The approach uses moderate-resolution land-imagery (MRLI) data from the Landsat and Advanced Wide Field Sensor satellites that has been classified by the National Agricultural Statistics Service into the Cropland Data Layer (CDL). Within the constraint of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's public health threshold for potable groundwater resources, the USGS modeled the relation between a population of the CDL's land uses and dynamic nitrate (NO3-) contamination of aquifers in a case study region in northeastern Iowa. Employing various multiscaled, multitemporal geospatial datasets with MRLI to maximize the value of agricultural production, the approach develops and uses multiple environmental science models to address dynamic nitrogen loading and transport at specified distances from specific sites (wells) and at landscape scales (for example, across 35 counties and two aquifers). In addition to the ecosystem service of potable groundwater, this effort focuses on the use of MRLI for the management of the major land uses in the study region-the production of corn and soybeans, which can impact groundwater quality. Derived methods and results include (1) economic and dynamic nitrate-pollution models, (2) probabilities of the survival of groundwater, and (3) a VOI for remote sensing. For the northeastern Iowa study region, the marginal benefit of the MRLI VOI (in 2010 dollars) is $858 million ±$197 million annualized, which corresponds to a net present value of $38.1 billion ±$8.8 billion for that flow of benefits in perpetuity. Given that these economic estimates are derived from one case study in a part of only one State, the estimates provide a lower estimate related to the potential value of the Landsat Data Continuity Mission.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2012

USGS Environmental health science strategy: providing environmental health science for a changing world: Public review release

America has an abundance of natural resources. We have bountiful clean water, fertile soil, and unrivaled national parks, wildlife refuges, and public lands. These resources enrich our lives and preserve our health and wellbeing. These resources have been maintained because of our history of respect for their value and an enduring commitment to their vigilant protection. Awareness of the social, economic, and personal value of the health of our environment is increasing. The emergence of environmentally driven diseases caused by environmental exposure to contaminants and pathogens is a growing concern worldwide. New health threats and patterns of established threats are affected by both natural and anthropogenic changes to the environment. Human activities are key drivers of emerging (new and re-emerging) health threats. Societal demands for land and natural resources, a better quality of life, improved economic prosperity, and the environmental impacts associated with these demands will continue to increase. Natural earth processes, climate trends, and related climatic events will add to the environmental impact of human activities. These environmental drivers will influence exposure to disease agents, including viral, bacterial, prion, and fungal pathogens, parasites, natural earth materials, toxins and other biogenic compounds, and synthetic chemicals and substances. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) defines environmental health science broadly as the interdisciplinary study of relations among the quality of the physical environment, the health of the living environment, and human health. The interactions among these three spheres are driven by human activities, ecological processes, and natural earth processes; the interactions affect exposure to contaminants and pathogens and the severity of environmentally driven diseases in animals and people. This definition provides USGS with a framework for synthesizing natural science information from across the Bureau and providing it to environmental, natural resource, agricultural, and public-health managers. The USGS is a Federal science agency with a broad range of natural science expertise relevant to environmental health. USGS provides scientific information and tools as a scientific basis for management and policy decision making. USGS specializes in science at the environment-health interface, by characterizing the processes that affect the interaction among the physical environment, the living environment, and people, and the resulting factors that affect ecological and human exposure to disease agents. This report describes a 10-year strategy that encompasses the portfolio of USGS environmental health science. It summarizes national environmental health priorities that USGS is best suited to address, and will serve as a strategic framework for USGS environmental health science goals, actions, and outcomes for the next decade. Implementation of this strategy is intended to aid coordination of USGS environmental health activities and to provide a focal point for disseminating information to stakeholders. The "One Health" paradigm advocated by the World Health Organization (WHO, 2011), and the American Veterinary Medicine Association (AVMA, 2008), among others, is based on a general recognition that the health of humans, animals, and the environment are inextricably linked. Thus, successful efforts to protect that health will require increased interdisciplinary research and increased communication and collaboration among the broader scientific and health community. This strategy is built upon that paradigm. The vision, mission, and five cornerstone goals of the USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy were developed with significant input from a wide range of stakeholders. Vision - The USGS is a premier source of the environmental health science needed to safeguard the health of the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. Mission - The mission of USGS in environmental health science is to contribute scientific information to environmental, natural resource, agricultural, and public-health managers, who use that science to support sound decision making. USGS provides the science to: - Goal 1: Identify, prioritize, and detect contaminants and pathogens of emerging environmental concern. - Goal 2: Reduce the impact of contaminants on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Goal 3: Reduce the impact of pathogens on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Goal 4: Discover the complex interactions and combined effects of exposure to contaminants and pathogens. - Goal 5: Prepare for and respond to environmental impacts and related health threats of natural and anthropogenic disasters. Goals 1 through 4 are intended to provide science to address environmental health threats in a logical order, from informing prevention and preparedness, to supporting systematic management response to environmental health issues. Goal 4 addresses the interaction among contaminants and pathogens, an issue of emerging concern in environmental health science. Goal 5 acknowledges the fact that natural and anthropogenic disasters can cause immediate and prolonged adverse environmental health threats. This strategy proposes that USGS take the following strategic science actions to achieve each of the five goals of this strategy: Goal 1: Identify, prioritize, and detect contaminants and pathogens of emerging environmental concern. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Prioritize contaminants and pathogens of emerging concern to guide research, detection, and management activities. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Conduct surveillance and monitoring to provide early warning of emerging health threats. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Develop approaches and tools that identify vulnerable environmental settings, ecosystems, and species. Goal 2: Reduce the impact of contaminants on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Systematically characterize the sources, occurrence, transport and fate of environmental contaminants to guide efforts to manage and mitigate contamination. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Evaluate the threats of contamination on the health of the environment, fish, wildlife, and people, and inform the associated management and protection efforts. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Characterize potential human exposure to support establishment of health-based standards or guidelines and contamination-reduction efforts. Goal 3: Reduce the impact of pathogens on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Determine the biotic and abiotic factors that control the ecology of infectious diseases affecting natural populations of aquatic and terrestrial species and potential transmission to other animals and humans. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Establish how natural and anthropogenic environmental changes affect the distribution and severity of infectious diseases in natural populations of aquatic and terrestrial species and potential transmission to other animals and humans. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Develop surveillance systems to identify changing patterns of disease activity in priority geographic areas. Goal 4: Discover the complex interactions and combined effects of exposure to contaminants and pathogens. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Identify how exposure to one class of disease agents (contaminants or pathogens) can make an organism more susceptible to effects from exposure to the other class of disease agents. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Implement interdisciplinary studies that characterize the effects of combined exposure to pathogens and contaminants. Goal 5: Prepare for and respond to the environmental impacts and related health threats of natural and anthropogenic disasters. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Establish a formal interdisciplinary science capability to rapidly assess the environmental health risks associated with disasters. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Enhance methods to anticipate, prepare for, and identify environmental, ecological, and related health impacts of future disasters. This strategy is one of seven USGS science strategies developed concurrently: - Climate and Land Use Change - Core Science Systems - Ecosystems - Energy and Mineral Resources - Environmental Health - Natural Hazards - Water. This strategy describes how USGS will address the highest priority environmental health issues facing the Nation. The ultimate intended outcome of this science strategy is prevention and reduction of adverse impacts to the quality of the environment, the health of our living resources, and human health. Communication with, and receiving input from, partners and stakeholders regarding their science needs is essential for successful implementation of this strategy. It is incumbent on USGS to reach out to all stakeholders to ensure that USGS efforts are focused on the highest priority environmental health issues and that products are provided in the most timely and usable form to all those who can use them. USGS must reach out to the scientific community, internally and externally, to ensure that our efforts are integrated with and take full advantage of the activities of others.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2012

Reducing Vulnerability of Ports and Harbors to Earthquake and Tsunami Hazards

Recent scientific research suggests the Pacific Northwest could experience catastrophic earthquakes in the near future, both from distant and local sources, posing a significant threat to coastal communities. Damage could result from numerous earthquake-related hazards, such as severe ground shaking, soil liquefaction, landslides, land subsidence/uplift, and tsunami inundation. Because of their geographic location, ports and harbors are especially vulnerable to these hazards. Ports and harbors, however, are important components of many coastal communities, supporting numerous activities critical to the local and regional economy and possibly serving as vital post-event, response-recovery transportation links. A collaborative, multi-year initiative is underway to increase the resiliency of Pacific Northwest ports and harbors to earthquake and tsunami hazards, involving Oregon Sea Grant (OSG), Washington Sea Grant (WSG), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coastal Services Center (CSC), and the U.S. Geological Survey Center for Science Policy (CSP). Specific products of this research, planning, and outreach initiative include a regional stakeholder issues and needs assessment, a community-based mitigation planning process, a Geographic Information System (GIS) — based vulnerability assessment methodology, an educational web-site and a regional data archive. This paper summarizes these efforts, including results of two pilot port-harbor community projects, one in Yaquina Bay, Oregon and the other in Sinclair Inlet, Washington. Finally, plans are outlined for outreach to other port and harbor communities in the Pacific Northwest and beyond, using "getting started" workshops and a web-based tutorial.

Oregon, Washington↗
USGS2008

Applying the land use portfolio model to estimate natural-hazard loss and risk — A hypothetical demonstration for Ventura County, California

With costs of natural disasters skyrocketing and populations increasingly settling in areas vulnerable to natural hazards, society is challenged to better allocate its limited risk-reduction resources. In 2000, Congress passed the Disaster Mitigation Act, amending the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, Pub. L. 93-288, 1988; Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2002, 2008b; Disaster Mitigation Act, 2000), mandating that State, local, and tribal communities prepare natural-hazard mitigation plans to qualify for pre-disaster mitigation grants and post-disaster aid. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was assigned to coordinate and implement hazard-mitigation programs, and it published information about specific mitigation-plan requirements and the mechanisms (through the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program-HMGP) for distributing funds (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2002). FEMA requires that each community develop a mitigation strategy outlining long-term goals to reduce natural-hazard vulnerability, mitigation objectives and specific actions to reduce the impacts of natural hazards, and an implementation plan for those actions. The implementation plan should explain methods for prioritizing, implementing, and administering the actions, along with a 'cost-benefit review' justifying the prioritization. FEMA, along with the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS), supported the development of HAZUS ('Hazards U.S.'), a geospatial natural-hazards loss-estimation tool, to help communities quantify potential losses and to aid in the selection and prioritization of mitigation actions. HAZUS was expanded to a multiple-hazard version, HAZUS-MH, that combines population, building, and natural-hazard science and economic data and models to estimate physical damages, replacement costs, and business interruption for specific natural-hazard scenarios. HAZUS-MH currently performs analyses for earthquakes, floods, and hurricane wind. HAZUS-MH loss estimates, however, do not account for some uncertainties associated with the specific natural-hazard scenarios, such as the likelihood of occurrence within a particular time horizon or the effectiveness of alternative risk-reduction options. Because of the uncertainties involved, it is challenging to make informative decisions about how to cost-effectively reduce risk from natural-hazard events. Risk analysis is one approach that decision-makers can use to evaluate alternative risk-reduction choices when outcomes are unknown. The Land Use Portfolio Model (LUPM), developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), is a geospatial scenario-based tool that incorporates hazard-event uncertainties to support risk analysis. The LUPM offers an approach to estimate and compare risks and returns from investments in risk-reduction measures. This paper describes and demonstrates a hypothetical application of the LUPM for Ventura County, California, and examines the challenges involved in developing decision tools that provide quantitative methods to estimate losses and analyze risk from natural hazards.

California↗
USGS2015

Sea-level rise modeling handbook: Resource guide for coastal land managers, engineers, and scientists

Global sea level is rising and may accelerate with continued fossil fuel consumption from industrial and population growth. In 2012, the U.S. Geological Survey conducted more than 30 training and feedback sessions with Federal, State, and nongovernmental organization (NGO) coastal managers and planners across the northern Gulf of Mexico coast to evaluate user needs, potential benefits, current scientific understanding, and utilization of resource aids and modeling tools focused on sea-level rise. In response to the findings from the sessions, this sea-level rise modeling handbook has been designed as a guide to the science and simulation models for understanding the dynamics and impacts of sea-level rise on coastal ecosystems. The review herein of decision-support tools and predictive models was compiled from the training sessions, from online research, and from publications. The purpose of this guide is to describe and categorize the suite of data, methods, and models and their design, structure, and application for hindcasting and forecasting the potential impacts of sea-level rise in coastal ecosystems. The data and models cover a broad spectrum of disciplines involving different designs and scales of spatial and temporal complexity for predicting environmental change and ecosystem response. These data and models have not heretofore been synthesized, nor have appraisals been made of their utility or limitations. Some models are demonstration tools for non-experts, whereas others require more expert capacity to apply for any given park, refuge, or regional application. A simplified tabular context has been developed to list and contrast a host of decision-support tools and models from the ecological, geological, and hydrological perspectives. Criteria were established to distinguish the source, scale, and quality of information input and geographic datasets; physical and biological constraints and relations; datum characteristics of water and land components; utility options for setting sea-level rise and climate change scenarios; and ease or difficulty of storing, displaying, or interpreting model output. Coastal land managers, engineers, and scientists can benefit from this synthesis of tools and models that have been developed for projecting causes and consequences of sea-level change on the landscape and seascape.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2018

The National Elevation Dataset

The National Elevation Dataset (NED) is a primary elevation data product that has been produced and distributed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Since its inception, the USGS has compiled and published topographic information in many forms, and the NED is a significant development in this long line of products that describe the land surface. The NED provides seamless raster elevation data of the conterminous United States (CONUS), Alaska, Hawaii, U.S. island territories, Mexico, and Canada. The NED is derived from diverse source datasets that are processed to a specification with consistent resolutions, coordinate system, elevation units, and horizontal and vertical datums. The NED was developed as the logical result of the maturation of the long-standing USGS elevation program, which for many years concentrated on production of quadrangle-based digital elevation models (DEM). The NED contributes to the elevation layer of The National Map, and it provides basic elevation information for earth science studies and mapping applications in the U.S. and most of North America. For over 15 years (1999–2014), the NED served as the flagship elevation product of the USGS. In 2015, the 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) was initiated. When the 3DEP initiative became operational, the name “National Elevation Dataset” (and the abbreviation “NED”) were retired as the USGS elevation activities and data were rebranded under the 3DEP banner. However, elevation data produced and distributed as part of the NED are still widely used (and distributed by other entities), so there is a continuing need for detailed documentation, including how it was produced, its accuracy, and how it is used. This chapter directly addresses that need for detailed information about the NED. The most recent detailed description of the NED appeared in the 2nd edition of the DEM Users Manual (2007), and because NED production continued through 2014, the details reported herein provide valuable information for data accessed by the user community from 2007 through 2014. The NED has been widely used in operational applications and research studies and is extensively cited in reports on those activities, so it is important for the user community to have access to information about the NED to better judge how its qualities and characteristics might affect results derived from its use as the elevation data source. Additionally, the NED seamless layers serve as one of the input data sources for the current 3DEP elevation production system, so, as with any input data source, an understanding of the data characteristics is critical.

Book chapter↗
USGS2020

Supporting the development and use of native plant materials for restoration on the Colorado Plateau (Fiscal Year 19 Report)

A primary focus of the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM’s) Colorado Plateau Native Plant Program (CPNPP) is to identify and develop appropriate native plant materials (NPMs) for current and future restoration projects. Multiple efforts have characterized the myriad challenges inherent in providing appropriate seed resources to enable effective, widespread restoration and have identified a broad suite of research activities to provide the information necessary to overcome those challenges (e.g., Plant Conservation Alliance 2015; Breed et al. 2018; Winkler et al. 2018). Many of the most complex information needs relate to identifying the appropriate sources of plant species that can successfully establish in dryland environments, like the Colorado Plateau, where low and highly variable precipitation is standard. Providing this information requires synergistic research efforts in which results from earlier investigations inform the design of subsequent investigations. The U.S. Geological Survey Southwest Biological Science Center’s (SBSC’s) research activities in FY19 followed an FY19 Statement of Work to support a research framework that is continually adapting based on the needs of the restoration community and results from previous investigations; the long-term research framework is outlined in the 2019-2023 5-Year Research Strategy (hereafter referred to as the 5-year plan). This research framework provides support for the National Seed Strategy for Rehabilitation and Restoration (Plant Conservation Alliance, 2015), Department of Interior Secretarial Order #3347 (Conservation Stewardship and Outdoor Recreation), and Department of Interior Leadership Priority #1 (Create a conservation stewardship legacy second only to Teddy Roosevelt). Research activities in FY19 centered on landscape genetics, collecting seeds in preparation for experimental common gardens, and planning and trials in support of experimental drought gardens. These activities were supported by three biological technicians, one of which was jointly funded by the Ecological Society of America for six pay periods. Most of the field-related activities, including plant trait measurement, seed/tissue collecting, and GRID (Germination for Restoration Information and Decision-making) experimental treatments at the Canyonlands Research Center near Moab, UT were assigned to these technicians. Contrary to the drought conditions the pervaded the Colorado Plateau in FY18, plentiful spring precipitation resulted in easily-collected plant tissue and seed collections. However, the cool and wet spring delayed the phenology of early blooming species, which caused difficulties for timing seed collecting. Furthermore, seed collecting for late blooming species was difficult because of lower than average monsoon precipitation. While Dr. Rob Massatti was the only scientist supported by the SBSC-CPNPP agreement in FY19, other scientists, including Drs. John Bradford, Seth Munson, Mike Duniway, Sasha Reed, and Daniel Winkler, spent a considerable amount of time providing expert guidance and support for individual projects. Work activities performed in support of each 5-year plan goal are discussed in turn.

Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah↗
USGS2010

Social Values for Ecosystem Services (SolVES): using GIS to include social values information in ecosystem services assessments

Ecosystem services can be defined in various ways; simply put, they are the benefits provided by nature, which contribute to human well-being. These benefits can range from tangible products such as food and fresh water to cultural services such as recreation and esthetics. As the use of these benefits continues to increase, additional pressures are placed on the natural ecosystems providing them. This makes it all the more important when assessing possible tradeoffs among ecosystem services to consider the human attitudes and preferences that express underlying social values associated with their benefits. While some of these values can be accounted for through economic markets, other values can be more difficult to quantify, and attaching dollar amounts to them may not be very useful in all cases. Regardless of the processes or units used for quantifying such values, the ability to map them across the landscape and relate them to the ecosystem services to which they are attributed is necessary for effective assessments. To address some of the needs associated with quantifying and mapping social values for inclusion in ecosystem services assessments, scientists at the Rocky Mountain Geographic Science Center (RMGSC), in collaboration with Colorado State University, have developed a public domain tool, Social Values for Ecosystem Services (SolVES). SolVES is a geographic information system (GIS) application designed to use data from public attitude and preference surveys to assess, map, and quantify social values for ecosystem services. SolVES calculates and maps a 10-point Value Index representing the relative perceived social values of ecosystem services such as recreation and biodiversity for various groups of ecosystem stakeholders. SolVES output can also be used to identify and model relationships between social values and physical characteristics of the underlying landscape. These relationships can then be used to generate predicted Value Index maps for areas where survey data are not available. RMGSC will continue to develop more robust versions of SolVES by pursuing opportunities to work with land and resource managers as well as other researchers to apply SolVES to specific ecosystem management problems.

Fact Sheet↗