USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Biological Technical Publication”

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 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
USGS2020

Annotated bibliography of scientific research on greater sage-grouse published from 2015 to 2019

The greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ; hereafter GRSG) has been a focus of scientific investigation and management action for the past two decades. The 2015 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listing determination of “not warranted” was in part due to a large-scale collaborative effort to develop strategies to conserve GRSG populations and their habitat and to reduce threats to both. New scientific information augments existing knowledge and can help inform updates or modifications to existing plans for managing GRSG and sagebrush ecosystems. However, the sheer number of scientific publications can be a challenge for managers tasked with evaluating and determining the need for potential updates to existing planning documents. To assist in this process, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has reviewed and summarized the scientific literature published since January 1, 2015. The first GRSG literature summary was published early in 2018. Here we provide an update to that document by adding summaries of articles published between January 6, 2018 and October 2, 2019. To identify articles and reports published about GRSG, we first conducted a structured search of three reference databases (Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar) using the search term “greater sage-grouse.” We refined the initial list of products by (1) removing duplicates, (2) excluding products that were not published as research or scientific review articles in peer-reviewed journals or as formal technical reports, and (3) retaining only those products for which GRSG or their habitat was a research focus. We summarized the contents of each product by using a consistent structure (background, objectives, methods, location, findings, and implications) and assessed the content of each product relevant to a list of 31 management topics. These topics include GRSG biology and habitat characteristics along with potential management actions, land uses, and environmental factors related to GRSG management and conservation. We also noted which articles/reports created new geospatial data. Our original search, conducted on January 7, 2018, and the application of our criteria, resulted in the inclusion of 169 published products (2 of these products were published corrections to journal articles). This update adds summaries of 69 products published between then and October 2, 2019. The management topics most commonly addressed were GRSG behavior or demographics and GRSG habitat selection or habitat characteristics at broad or site scales. Few products addressed captive breeding, recreation, wild horses and burros, and range management structures (including fences). The management topics with the largest increase in representation between the 2018 GRSG literature summary and this update were GRSG survival and GRSG population estimates or targets, which were each addressed in 16 percent of products in the original literature summary document, but were addressed in 30 and 33 percent, respectively, of newly summarized products. Topics with the largest declines in representation were conifer expansion, - 17 to 10 percent, and new geospatial data, -31 to 21 percent. We include in this annotated bibliography the full citation, Digital Object Identifier (DOI), product summary, and management topics addressed by each product. The online version of this bibliography (https://apps.usgs.gov/gsgbib/index.php) is searchable by topic and location and includes links to journal landing pages for each original publication. A substantial body of literature has been compiled on research explicitly related to the conservation, management, monitoring, and assessment of GRSG. These studies may inform planning and management actions that seek to balance conservation, economic, and social objectives and manage diverse resource uses and values across the western United States. The review process for this product included requesting input on each summary from one or more authors of the original peer-reviewed article or report and a formal review of the entire document by three independent reviewers for the original document and by two independent reviewers for the updated document and, subsequently, the USGS Bureau Approving Official. This process is consistent with USGS Fundamental Science Practices.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Mont↗
USGS2004

Writing refuge management goals and objectives: a handbook

Goals and objectives are the unifying elements of successful refuge management. They identify and focus management priorities, provide a context for resolving issues, guide specific projects, provide rationale for decisions, and offer a defensible link among management actions, refuge purpose(s), Service policy, and the National Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System) mission. Pursuant to Refuge Planning Policy (602 FW 1, 3, 4), this handbook offers guidance on how to write goals and objectives for national wildlife refuges and provides counsel on their development. While the handbook specifically addresses biology and visitor services, you can also utilize this guidance when developing goals and objectives for other refuge programs. Several assumptions are basic to this handbook. The handbook focuses on the mechanics of writing sound goals and objectives. Detailed guidance on what information to consider, collect, interpret, and synthesize into goals and objectives is beyond the scope of this handbook. It views a vision statement as the synthesis of a refuge’s purpose(s), the Refuge System mission and goals, and other biological, legal, and social concerns in which the refuge has a role. It also assumes a familiarity with the hierarchical nature of planning and where, within a planning process, the writing of goals and objectives occurs. This guidance applies to conceptual management plans, comprehensive conservation plans (CCPs), step-down management plans (e.g., habitat management, visitor services, fire management), or any other planning document incorporating goals and objectives, including strategic documents developed under the Government Performance and Results Act. We intend this guidance for use by an internal audience tasked with writing refuge goals and objectives, primarily refuge managers, biologists, visitor services specialists, planners, and other members of refuge planning teams. Still, it recognizes that we should write goals and objectives so that interested members of the public can understand them, to the extent this does not jeopardize the technical accuracy or reduce the inclusion of necessary information. The terminology and definitions used in this handbook are widely accepted in the planning field and are not inconsistent with more recent application in strategic planning. Perhaps most important, the handbook presumes all goals and objectives must further the specific purpose(s) of the refuge and the broader mission of the Refuge System, as well as be consistent with Refuge Planning Policy and any other relevant Service policy and directives.

Report↗
USGS2009

Bat Rabies and Other Lyssavirus Infections

Bat Rabies and Other Lyssavirus Infections offers readers an overview of the virus variants that cause bat rabies, and geographical patterns in occurrence of this disease. The section Species Susceptibility describes infection rates and trends among bats, humans, and other animals. Disease Ecology considers the biological and environmental dynamics of the disease in various species of bats. Points to Ponder: Interspecies Interactions in Potential Bat Rabies Transmission Settings discusses the narrowing interface of bat colonies and human society and how humans and domestic animals play a role in transmission of bat rabies. Disease Prevention and Control outlines how to limit exposure to rabid bats and other animals. Appendixes include extensive tables of reported infections in bat species and in humans, and a glossary of technical terms is included. The author, Denny G. Constantine, helped define rabies infection in insect-eating bats and has investigated bat rabies ecology for more than half a century. He has authored more than 90 papers during the course of his career and is widely considered to be the world's foremost authority on the disease. Currently, Dr. Constantine is a public health officer emeritus and veterinary epidemiologist for the California Department of Health Services Viral and Rickettsial Disease Laboratory. Milt Friend, first director of the USGS National Wildlife Health Center, wrote the foreword. David Blehert, a USGS microbiologist who is investigating the emergence and causes of bat white-nose syndrome, edited the volume. Bat Rabies is intended for scholars and the general public. Dr. Constantine presents the material in a simple, straightforward manner that serves both audiences. The goal of the author is to increase people's understanding of both bat and disease ecology and also provide a balanced perspective on human risks pertaining to bat rabies.

Circular↗
USGS2007

Applying radar technology to migratory bird conservation and management: Strengthening and expanding a collaborative

Executive Summary Understanding the factors affecting migratory bird and bat populations during all three phases of their life cycle—breeding, nonbreeding, and migration—is critical to species conservation planning. This includes the need for information about these species’ responses to natural challenges, as well as information about the effects of human activities and structures. Habitats and other resources critical to migrants during passage and stopover are being destroyed, degraded, and threatened by human activities. Birds and bats are also uniquely susceptible to human use of the airspace. Wind turbines, communication and power transmission towers, and other tall structures, known to cause bird and bat mortality, are being erected or proposed in increasing numbers across the country. In addition, the potential for bird/aircraft collisions poses human safety threats. Management and regulatory agencies, conservation organizations, and industry currently lack the information they need to meet their missions and statutory responsibilities. The biological data available from various radar technologies offer a unique opportunity to learn more about the spatiotemporal distribution patterns, flight characteristics, and habitat use of “aero-fauna.” Recognizing the opportunities presented by radar technologies, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and university partners collaborated first on individual projects and then in a broader, informal “collaborative” to coordinate their radar-related research and work together to develop the suite of products needed for conservation of birds and bats. Having produced two summary documents (Sojda and others, 2005; Ruth and others, 2005), the next objective was to convene a workshop for researchers, management and regulatory agencies, and other interested parties. The focus of this initial workshop was on strengthening the existing USGS-USFWS-university partnership and expanding the “collaborative” to include new Federal agency partners. The subject matter was centered on discussing available technologies, appropriate applications, management-related needs, and ways to strengthen collaborative research and conservation efforts. The workshop opened with presentations about the history of the “radar collaborative,” a description of the workshop objectives and focuses, and a summary of resource management and regulatory needs. Scientific presentations describing current research projects or subjects followed, given by USGS scientists, as well as scientists from other Federal agencies, academia, conservation and ornithological organizations, and a private contracting firm. Presenters addressed a wide variety of management issues including siting of wind-power facilities, bird/aircraft collisions, effects of hurricanes Katrina and Rita on bird migration, bird use of Conservation Reserve Program land, defining bird migration patterns at a broad regional scale, and associating migrant birds with their stopover habitats. Presentations described a variety of radar technologies including NEXRAD weather surveillance radar, modified mobile marine radar, military tracking radar, pencil beam radar, and dual polarization radar, as well as complementary techniques and analysis methods such as acoustic monitoring, thermal imaging, artificial intelligence, and individual-based modeling. Key issues, themes, and questions identified during the open discussions that followed fell into five main categories: (1) agency needs and challenges; (2) radar technology and applications—technical questions and issues; (3) tools and resources for managers and researchers; (4) standardization of protocols; and (5) collaborative opportunities. Participants identified the following management, regulatory, or business issues facing them which may be addressed with radar technologies: tall structures; wind turbines; identification and protection of key habitats; assessment of management activities; and bird/aircraft strikes. Participants frequently expressed the need for specific information about which radar technologies are best used for answering particular questions. User groups emphasized the importance of clear, defensible scientific information on which they can base their activities. In turn, researchers emphasized their need for clearly defined, specific questions from managers so that they can design and conduct the required research. Discussions about technical issues requiring further research and collaboration included target identity, ground-truthing, linking migrants to habitat, and standardized protocols for applied research. Workshop participants identified and endorsed a series of seven action items that would promote collaboration and begin to address key issues identified at the workshop: Action Item #1 : Establish a working subgroup to address large-scale surveillance radar standardization issues. Action Item #2 : Establish a working subgroup to address small-scale radar standardization issues. Action Item #3 : Bring management and regulatory agencies together to identify the three most important information needs for each key management issue relating to radar technologies. Action Item #4 : Develop Fact Sheet(s) to provide information about radar technology applications to migratory bird and bat conservation issues. Action Item #5 : Create a “radar collaborative” Website to provide information about radar biology applications, contacts, publications, and so forth. Action Item #6 : Formalize and expand the USGS-USFWS “radar collaborative.” Action Item #7 : Advance basic research, such as target identity and validation, which will support and improve our abilities to apply radar technologies to conservation objectives. There was considerable interest in expanding the “radar collaborative” to include those agencies, organizations, and industries represented at the workshop. It was felt that the publication of the workshop proceedings, implementation of action items, and additional future meetings or workshops will be crucial in strengthening the “radar collaborative” effort and promoting the use of these valuable technologies for conserving migratory species.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2002

Use of sediment quality guidelines and related tools for the asssessment of contaminated sediments: Executive summary sooklet of a SETAC Pellston Workshop

This publication summarizes the results of a Pellston Workshop sponsored by the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC), held 17-22 August 2002 in Fairmont, Montana, USA. The full technical proceedings of the workshop will be published separately by SET AC in 2003. Previous SETAC workshops have focused on sediment ecological risk assessment (ERA) (Dickson et al. 1987; Ingersoll et al. 1997) and porewater toxicity testing (Carr and Nipper 2003). Another recent workshop addressed the application of weight-of-evidence (WOE) methods in ERA (Burton et al. 2002). These previous workshops focused on how, when, and why ERAs are needed in sediment assessments. However, more focused discussion among scientists, environmental regulators, and environmental managers is now needed to build on this previous work. Specifically, additional guidance is needed on procedures that can be used to integrate the information derived from multiple chemical and biological lines of evidence (LOE). These LOE, which are developed through the application of different assessment tools, often include the use of chemically based sediment quality guidelines (SQGs) to evaluate sediment contamination and to help practitioners in sediment assessment and management formulate risk management decisions. This workshop focused on evaluation of the scientific foundations supporting different chemically based numeric SQGs and methods to improve the integration of SQGs into different sediment quality assessment frameworks that include information derived from multiple chemical and biological LOE.

SETAC Pellston Workshop↗
USGS1998

Simulating transport of volatile organic compounds in the unsaturated zone using the computer model R-UNSAT

Subsurface spills of gasoline and other petroleum products are a common environmental problem throughout the industrialized world. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has estimated that 40 percent of the more than 200,000 retail service stations in the United States have had accidental releases of petroleum hydrocarbons to the subsurface (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1991). Restoration of a contaminated aquifer to regulatory standards is a technically difficult problem even when best engineering strategies are applied. Natural attenuation, a remediation strategy that relies on intrinsic physical, chemical, and biological processes to decrease contaminant concentrations, is gaining widespread acceptance in aquifer restoration efforts (Tremblay and others, 1995). The potential for successful remediation by natural attenuation depends on the fate of the organic constituents of the spilled product, which may include additives such as methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE). These compounds can dissolve in ground water, adsorb to subsurface sediments, volatilize and diffuse through the unsaturated zone, or undergo chemical and biological reactions (fig. 1). Volatilization and biodegradation near the water table are two processes that can contribute significantly to the natural attenuation of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in shallow ground water (McAllister and Chiang, 1994). To date, quantitative information on the rates at which these processes occur has been limited. R-UNSAT, a computer model designed for quantifying rates of volatilization and biodegradation of organic compounds near the water table, was developed and documented by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and is now available to the public. R-UNSAT also can be applied, however, to other unsaturated-zone transport problems that involve gas diffusion, such as radon migration, and the deposition of compounds from the atmosphere to shallow ground water. This fact sheet describes the transport model and demonstrates its capabilities through applications to point- and nonpoint-source contamination.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2007

Proceedings of the Fourth Glacier Bay Science Symposium

Foreword Glacier Bay was established as a National Monument in 1925, in part to protect its unique character and natural beauty, but also to create a natural laboratory to examine evolution of the glacial landscape. Today, Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve is still a place of profound natural beauty and dynamic landscapes. It also remains a focal point for scientific research and includes continuing observations begun decades ago of glacial processes and terrestrial ecosystems. In recent years, research has focused on glacial-marine interactions and ecosystem processes that occur below the surface of the bay. In October 2004, Glacier Bay National Park convened the fourth in a series of science symposiums to provide an opportunity for researchers, managers, interpreters, educators, students and the general public to share knowledge about Glacier Bay. The Fourth Glacier Bay Science Symposium was held in Juneau, Alaska, rather than at the Park, reflecting a desire to maximize attendance and communication among a growing and diverse number of stakeholders interested in science in the park. More than 400 people attended the symposium. Participants provided 46 oral presentations and 41 posters covering a wide array of disciplines including geology, glaciology, oceanography, wildlife and fisheries biology, terrestrial and marine ecology, socio-cultural research and management issues. A panel discussion focused on the importance of connectivity in Glacier Bay research, and keynote speakers (Gary Davis and Terry Chapin) spoke of long-term monitoring and ecological processes. These proceedings include 56 papers from the symposium. A summary of the Glacier Bay Science Plan-itself a subject of a meeting during the symposium and the result of ongoing discussions between scientists and resource managers-also is provided. We hope these proceedings illustrate the diversity of completed and ongoing scientific studies, conducted within the Park. To this end, we invited all presenters to submit brief technical summaries of their work, to capture the gist of their study and its main findings without an overload of details and methodology. We also asked authors to include a few words on the management implications of their work to help bridge the gap between scientists and managers in understanding how specific research questions may translate to management practice. Papers in this volume are laid out by subject matter, from terrestrial and freshwater subjects to glacial-marine geology, to the ecology of marine animals and ending with risk assessment, human impacts and science-management considerations. In summary, we hope the proceedings will serve as a useful reference to completed and ongoing studies in Glacier Bay National Park, and thereby provide park enthusiasts, scientists, and managers with a road map of scientific progress.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2001

Systems identification and the adaptive management of waterfowl in the United States

Waterfowl management in the United States is one of the more visible conservation success stories in the United States. It is authorized and supported by appropriate legislative authorities, based on large-scale monitoring programs, and widely accepted by the public. The process is one of only a limited number of large-scale examples of effective collaboration between research and management, integrating scientific information with management in a coherent framework for regulatory decision-making. However, harvest management continues to face some serious technical problems, many of which focus on sequential identification of the resource system in a context of optimal decision-making. The objective of this paper is to provide a theoretical foundation of adaptive harvest management, the approach currently in use in the United States for regulatory decision-making. We lay out the legal and institutional framework for adaptive harvest management and provide a formal description of regulatory decision-making in terms of adaptive optimization. We discuss some technical and institutional challenges in applying adaptive harvest management and focus specifically on methods of estimating resource states for linear resource systems.

Wildlife Biology↗
USGS2015

Biological and geochemical data along Indian Point, Vermilion Bay, Louisiana

Scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey, St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center collected shallow sediment cores and surface samples from a coastal salt marsh environment next to Vermilion Bay in southwest Louisiana in January 2013. The sampling was part of a larger USGS study to gather data for assessing environmental changes over the past 150 years. The objective of the study was to expand upon the historical context of sea level and storms affecting coastal systems and how these systems might change under persistent or varying conditions. The data from this report add to a regional environmental change database that aids with the continuing effort to understand the evolution of coastal systems. This report serves as an archive for sedimentological, radiochemical, and microbiological data derived from the sediment cores. Data are available for January 2013. Downloadable data are available as Excel spreadsheets and as JPEG files. Additional files include ArcGIS shapefiles of the sampling sites, detailed results of sediment analyses, and formal Federal Geographic Data Committee metadata. Acknowledgments The authors thank Nancy DeWitt, B.J. Reynolds, Christopher Reich (USGS, St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center), for help with sample collection and processing; Michael Ball, Sarai Piazza, and Gregory Steyer (USGS, Coastal Restoration Assessment Branch) for assistance accessing CRMS Site 541; and Darrell Anders and Phillip Turnipseed (USGS National Wetlands Research Center) for technical support while in the field. We would also like to thank Caitlyn Reynolds and Nicholas Zaremba for their pre-release commentary and peer review. Information Statement This publication was prepared by an agency of the United States Government. Although these data were processed successfully on a computer system at the U.S. Geological Survey, no warranty expressed or implied is made regarding the display or utility of the data on any other system, or for general or scientific purposes, nor shall the act of distribution imply any such warranty. The U.S. Geological Survey shall not be held liable for improper or incorrect use of the data described and (or) contained herein. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency

Louisiana↗
USGS2002

Science and management of Rocky Mountain grizzly bears

The science and management of grizzly bears ( Ursus arctos horribilis ) in the Rocky Mountains of North America have spawned considerable conflict and controversy. Much of this can be attributed to divergent public values, but the narrow perceptions and incomplete and fragmented problem definitions of those involved have exacerbated an inherently difficult situation. We present a conceptual model that extends the traditional description of the grizzly bear conservation system to include facets of the human domain such as the behavior of managers, elected officials, and the public. The model focuses on human-caused mortality, the key determinant of grizzly bear population growth in this region and the interactions and feedback loops among humans that have a major potential influence on bear mortality. We also briefly evaluate existing information and technical methods relevant to understanding this complex human-biophysical system. We observe not only that the extant knowledge is insufficient for prediction (and in some cases for description), but also that traditional positivistic science alone is not adequate for dealing with the problems of grizzly bear conservation. We recommend changes in science and management that could improve learning and responsiveness among the involved individuals and organizations, clarify some existing uncertainty, and thereby increase the effectiveness of grizzly bear conservation and management. Although adaptive management is a promising approach, we point out some key—as yet unfulfilled—contingencies for implementation of a method such as this one that relies upon social processes and structures that promote open learning and flexibility in all facets of the policy process.

Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Utah, Washin↗
USGS2010

Fort Collins Science Center-Fiscal year 2009 science accomplishments

Public land and natural resource managers in the United States are confronted with increasingly complex decisions that have important ramifications for both ecological and human systems. The scientists and technical professionals at the U.S. Geological Survey Fort Collins Science Center?many of whom are at the forefront of their fields?possess a unique blend of ecological, socioeconomic, and technological expertise. Because of this diverse talent, Fort Collins Science Center staff are able to apply a systems approach to investigating complicated ecological problems in a way that helps answer critical management questions. In addition, the Fort Collins Science Center has a long record of working closely with the academic community through cooperative agreements and other collaborations. The Fort Collins Science Center is deeply engaged with other U.S. Geological Survey science centers and partners throughout the Department of the Interior. As a regular practice, we incorporate the expertise of these partners in providing a full complement of ?the right people? to effectively tackle the multifaceted research problems of today's resource-management world. In Fiscal Year 2009, the Fort Collins Science Center's scientific and technical professionals continued research vital to Department of the Interior's science and management needs. Fort Collins Science Center work also supported the science needs of other Federal and State agencies as well as non-government organizations. Specifically, Fort Collins Science Center research and technical assistance focused on client and partner needs and goals in the areas of biological information management and delivery, enterprise information, fisheries and aquatic systems, invasive species, status and trends of biological resources (including human dimensions), terrestrial ecosystems, and wildlife resources. In the process, Fort Collins Science Center science addressed natural-science information needs identified in the U.S. Geological Survey Science Strategy (http://www.usgs.gov/science_strategy), including understanding and predicting change in ecosystems, climate variability and change, energy development and land management, the role of the environment and wildlife in human health, freshwater ecosystems, data integration, and evolving technologies. Several science projects were expanded in Fiscal Year 2009 to meet these evolving needs.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2007

Earth science and public health: Proceedings of the Second National Conference on USGS Health-Related Research

The mission of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is to serve the Nation by providing reliable scientific information to describe and understand the earth; minimize loss of life and property from natural disasters; manage water, biological, energy, and mineral resources; and enhance and protect our quality of life. As the Nation?s largest water, earth, and biological science and civilian mapping agency, the USGS can play a significant role in providing scientific knowledge and information that will improve our understanding of the relations of environment and wildlife to human health and disease. USGS human health-related research is unique in the Federal government because it brings together a broad spectrum of natural science expertise and information, including extensive data collection and monitoring on varied landscapes and ecosystems across the Nation. USGS can provide a great service to the public health community by synthesizing the scientific information and knowledge on our natural and living resources that influence human health, and by bringing this science to the public health community in a manner that is most useful. Partnerships with health scientists and managers are essential to the success of these efforts. USGS scientists already are working closely with the public health community to pursue rigorous inquiries into the connections between natural science and public health. Partnering agencies include the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Agency for Toxic Substances Disease Registry, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Food and Drug Administration, Mine Safety and Health Administration, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Public Health Service, and the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases. Collaborations between public health scientists and earth scientists can lead to improved solutions for existing and emerging environmental health problems. This report summarizes the presentations and discussions held at the Second National Conference on USGS Health-Related Research, held at the USGS national headquarters in Reston, Virginia. The report presents 68 abstracts of technical presentations made at the conference and summaries of six topical breakout sessions. The abstracts cover a broad range of issues and demonstrate connections between human health and the quality and condition of our environment and wildlife. The summaries of the topical breakout sessions present ideas for advancing interdisciplinary science in areas of earth science and human health.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2018

Evaluating and managing environmental water regimes in a water-scarce and uncertain future

While the number of environmental flows and water science programmes continues to grow across the globe, there remains a critical need to better balance water availability in support of human and ecological needs and to recognise the environment as a legitimate user of water. In water‐stressed areas, this recognition has resulted in friction between water users in the public and private sectors. An opportunity exists for practitioners to be on the forefront of the science determining best practices for supporting environmental water regimes. This Special Issue brings together a collection of environmental flows science and water management papers organised around three major themes: (1) method development and testing; (2) application case studies; and (3) efficacy evaluation. Contents of this Special Issue are intended to foster collaboration and broaden transferability of the information, technical tools, models and methods needed to support environmental water management programmes. The technical sophistication of methods and modelling tools, while important to the advancement of environmental water science, may come at the expense of easily interpretable outcomes that positively influence management decisions. Researchers need to be more proactive in translating the results of advanced modelling methodologies into user‐friendly tools and methods. This will allow stakeholders and water managers to proactively test alternative water allocation scenarios to help address growing human water demands in the face of droughts and changes in climatic patterns. The application of environmental flows science and water management strategies cannot be done in isolation. Implementation involves a complex decision‐making process that integrates ecological, hydrologic and social science across diverse multifaceted governance systems and requires active stakeholder involvement. Scientists and managers must strengthen partnerships at multiple scales to develop sensible science investment strategies so that collective knowledge can be translated into wise environmental water management decisions.

Freshwater Biology↗
USGS1989

The ecology of hydric hammocks: a community profile

This community profile is one in a series of Fish and Wildlife Service publications compiled to provide a state-of-knowledge synthesis of scientific information and literature on various coastal habitats. The subject of this profile is the hydric hammock, a distinctive type of forested wetland occurring at low elevations along the gulf coast of Florida from Aripeka to St. Marks and at various inland sites in Florida. Relatively little research has been conducted in hydric hammocks, and no thorough effort has been made previously to define this community. Consequently, no consensus has existed about the extent and nature of this community; some published works and active researchers have differed in their judgments about it; and the entity sometimes is ignored and often is lumped with other types of mixed hardwood forests. The purpose of this profile is to establish or clarify an identification and understanding of the hydric-hammock community. Information for the profile was gathered from published and unpublished literature, from persona 1 communication with many technical experts, and from our own fie 1 d experience. The profile includes some new data gathered in the field for the purpose of defining this community. It is hoped that the content and format of the profile will be useful to a broad spectrum of users, including other scientists, students, resource managers and planners, teachers, and interested citizens. The profile includes structural and functional aspects of the community: its physical setting, plant and animal composition and dynamics, interactions of its flora and fauna, and its relationships with other communities.

Florida↗
USGS2023

Wildlife health surveillance: Gaps, needs and opportunities

Disease emergence represent a global threat for public health, economy, and biological conservation and most of the emerging diseases have zoonotic origin from wildlife. To prevent their spread and to support the implementation of control measures, disease surveillance and reporting systems are needed, and due to globalisation, these activities should be carried at world level. To define the main gaps affecting the performances of wildlife health surveillance and reporting systems at word level, we analysed the Wildlife Disease Surveillance Survey submitted to all Members of World Organisation for Animal Health which inquire on structure and limits of surveillance and reporting systems. The response from 103 Members, covering all world areas, showed that 54.4% of them have a wildlife disease surveillance programme and 66% implemented a strategy to manage their spread. The lack of dedicated budget affected the possibility of outbreak investigations, sampling collection and diagnostic testing. Although most Members maintain records relating to wildlife mortality or morbidity events in centralised databases, data analyses and disease risk assessment are reported as main needs. Our evaluation of surveillance capacity showed an overall low level associated to great variability between Members not restricted to specific geographical area. A better recognition of the value of wildlife disease surveillance resulting in allocation of adequate resources by governments would make wildlife disease surveillance systems more functional. Moreover, the future comprehension of the influence of socio-economic, cultural and biodiversity aspects will be essential to increase better disease surveillance under One Health approach.

Scientific and Technical Review↗
USGS2015

2013 Survey of Iowa groundwater and evaluation of public well vulnerability classifications for contaminants of emerging concern

Studies in Iowa have long documented the vulnerability of wells with less than 50 feet (15 meters) of confining materials above the source aquifer to contamination from nitrate and various pesticides. Recent studies in Wisconsin have documented the occurrence of viruses in untreated groundwater, even in wells considered to have little vulnerability to contamination from near-surface activities. In addition, sensitive methods have become available for analyses of pharmaceuticals and pesticides. This study represents the first comprehensive examination of contaminants of emerging concern in Iowa’s groundwater conducted to date, and one of the first conducted in the United States. Raw groundwater samples were collected from 66 public supply wells during the spring of 2013, when the state was recovering from drought conditions. Samples were analyzed for 206 chemical and biological parameters; including 20 general water-quality parameters and major ions, 19 metals, 5 nutrients, 10 virus groups, 3 species of pathogenic bacteria, 5 microbial indicators, 108 pharmaceuticals, 35 pesticides and pesticide degradates, and tritium. The wells chosen for this study represent a diverse range of ages, depths, confining material thicknesses, pumping rates, and land use settings. The most commonly detected contaminant group was pesticide compounds, which were present in 41% of the samples. As many as 6 pesticide compounds were found together in a sample, most of which were chloroacetanilide degradates. While none of the measured concentrations of pesticide compounds exceeded current benchmark levels, several of these compounds are listed on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Contaminant Candidate List and could be subject to drinking water standards in the future. Despite heavy use in the past decade, glyphosate was not detected, and its metabolite, aminomethylphosphonic acid, was only detected in two of 60 wells tested (3%) at the detection limit of 0.02 μg/L. Pharmaceutical compounds were detected in 35% of 63 samples. Of the 14 pharmaceuticals detected, six had reported concentrations above the method reporting limit, with the maximum reported concentration of 826 ng/L for acetaminophen. Diphenhydramine was the only pharmaceutical to have two detections above the reporting limit, at 24.5 and 145 ng/L. Eight pharmaceuticals had confirmed detections at concentrations below the method reporting limit. Caffeine was the most frequently detected pharmaceutical compound (25%), followed by the caffeine metabolite, 1,7- dimethylxanthine (16%). Microorganisms were detected in 21% of the wells using quantitative polymerase chain reaction methodologies. The most frequently detected microorganism was the pepper mild mottle virus (PMMV), a plant pathogen found in human waste. PMMV was detected in 17% of samples at concentrations ranging from 0.4 to 6.38 gene copies per liter. GII norovirus, human polyomavirus, bovine polyomavirus, and Campylobacter were also detected, while adenovirus, enterovirus, GI norovirus, swine hepatitis E, Salmonella, and enterohemmorhagic E. coli were not detected. No correlations were found between viruses or pathogenic bacteria and microbial indicators. Wells with less than 50 feet (15 meters) of confining material were shown to have greater incidence of surface-related contaminants; however, significant relationships (p<0.05) between confining layer thickness and contaminants were only found for nitrate and herbicides.

Iowa↗
USGS1995

Pinyon-juniper woodlands

Pinyon-juniper woodlands are one of the largest ecosystems in the Southwest and in the Middle Rio Grande Basin (Fig. 1). The woodlands have been important to the region's inhabitants since prehistoric times for a variety of natural resources and amenities. The ecosystems have not been static; their distributions, stand characteristics, and site conditions have been altered by changes in climatic patterns and human use and, often, abuse. Management of these lands since European settlement has varied from light exploitation and benign neglect, to attempts to remove the trees in favor of forage for livestock, and then to a realization that these lands contain useful resources and should be managed accordingly. Land management agencies are committed to ecosystem management. While there are several definitions of ecosystem management, the goal is to use ecological approaches to create and maintain diverse, productive, and healthy ecosystems (Kaufmann et al. 1994). Ecosystem management recognizes that people are an integral part of the system and that their needs must be considered. Ecological approaches are central to the concept, but our understanding of basic woodland ecology is incomplete, and there are different opinions and interpretations of existing information (Gottfried and Severson 1993). There are many questions concerning proper ecosystem management of the pinyon-juniper woodlands and how managers can achieve these goals (Gottfried and Severson 1993). While the broad concept of ecosystem management generally is accepted, the USDA Forest Service, other public land management agencies, American Indian tribes, and private landowners may have differing definitions of what constitutes desired conditions. Key questions about the pinyon-juniper ecosystems remain unanswered. Some concern the basic dynamics of biological and physical components of the pinyon-juniper ecosystems. Others concern the distribution of woodlands prior to European settlement and changes since the introduction of livestock and fire control. This relates to whether tree densities have been increasing or whether trees are invading grasslands and, to a lesser extent, drier ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) forests. In areas where woodlands were heavily used by American Indians for fuelwood prior to European contact, the advance of pinyon and juniper could represent the slow recovery from intensive use (Samuels and Betancourt 1982). There are numerous questions regarding declines in watershed condition related to changes in pinyon-juniper tree stand densities and to the density and composition of understory vegetation. There are different opinions about proper management of woodland ecosystems. Should these lands be managed for a single resource, such as forage for livestock production, or managed for sustained production of multiple resource products and amenities? Depending on site and stand conditions, the woodlands can produce variable quantities of fuelwood, pinyon nuts, wildlife habitat, forage for livestock, and cover for watershed protection. Management must also consider increasing recreational demands, threatened and endangered species, and protection of archeological sites. Many pinyon-juniper woodland watersheds in New Mexico have unsatisfactory soil and watershed conditions (USDA Forest Service 1993); managers must develop restoration procedures that recognize the value of woodland ecosystems. The concerns, questions, and conflicts surrounding management of pinyon-juniper lands, as well as the ecological foundations of ecosystem management, require that all interested parties reevaluate attitudes toward the woodlands. Ecosystem management goals and concepts recognize diversity. Pinyonjuniper woodlands are diverse, and stand characteristics and site productivities vary. Management objectives and prescriptions must evaluate the potential of each site, and decisions must be based on sound scientific information. This information is often unavailable. Therefore, this paper describes what we do know about the characteristics, distribution, and ecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands, including the effects of natural and human factors, within the southwestern United States and particularly the Middle Rio Grande Basin. It also reviews some past and present management options in this widespread and important vegetation type. The review draws on research and management information from the Rio Grande Basin and from similar areas in the Southwest and adjacent regions. It does not attempt to review all of the relevant literature; additional sources can be found within the articles cited in the References.

General Technical Report↗
USGS1980

Handbook of acute toxicity of chemicals to fish and aquatic invertebrates : summaries of toxicity tests conducted at Columbia National Fisheries Research Laboratory, 1965-78

Acute toxicity is a major subject of research at Columbia National Fisheries Research Laboratory for evaluating the impact of toxic chemicals on fishery resources. The Laboratory has played a leading role in developing research technology for toxicity testing and data interpretation. In 1965-78, more than 400 chemicals were tested against a variety of invertebrates and fish species representative of both cold- and warm-water climates. The use of acute toxicity tests for assessing the potential hazard of chemical contaminants to aquatic organisms is well documented (Boyd 1957; Henderson et al. 1960; Sanders and Cope 1966; Macek and McAllister 1970). Static acute toxicity tests provide rapid and (within limits) reproducible concentration-response curves for estimating toxic effects of chemicals on aquatic organisms. These tests provide a database for determining relative toxicity of a large number of chemicals to a variety of species and for estimating acute effects of chemical spills on natural aquatic systems; they also assist in determining priority and design of additional toxicity studies. Acute toxicity tests usually provide estimates of the exposure concentration causing 50% mortality (LC50) to test organisms during a specified period of time. For certain invertebrates, the effective concentration is based on immobilization, or some other identifiable endpoint, rather than on lethality. The application of the LC50 has gained acceptance among toxicologists and is generally the most highly rated test for assessing potential adverse effects of chemical contaminants to aquatic life (Brungs and Mount 1978; American Institute for Biological Sciences 1978 a ). The literature contains numerous papers dealing with the acute toxicity of chemicals to freshwater organisms. However, there is a tremendous need for a concise compendium of toxicity data covering a large variety of chemicals and test species. This Handbook is a compilation of a large volume of acute toxicity data from the Columbia Laboratory and its field laboratories. It presents definitive acute toxicity data on 271 chemicals tested against a variety of freshwater invertebrates and fishes. The chemicals represent all major groups of pesticides, as well as numerous industrial chemicals. This compilation should serve as a useful database for the many agencies and organizations dealing with research and management programs concerned with the impact of chemicals on aquatic resources. The Columbia Laboratory has played a major role in developing currently used standard methodology for static acute toxicity testing. The use of standardized methodology greatly reduces variation in results. The data presented here have been carefully scrutinized to eliminate tests that failed to follow acceptable procedures. Handling of test organisms and procedures for static toxicity tests followed those described by Lennon and Walker (1964) and Macek and McAllister (1970), and conform well with those recommended by Brauhn and Schoettger (1975) and the Committee on Methods for Toxicity Tests with Aquatic Organisms (1975). The species of fish and invertebrates that were tested are listed in phylogenetic order in Tables 1 and 2. Fish were obtained from Federal and State hatcheries as either eggs or fry. Original stocks of invertebrates were collected and cultured from wild populations with no known source of contamination; these populations were replenished regularly. The invertebrates were cultured in the Laboratory by methods similar to those described by Sanders and Cope (1966). Test chemicals usually consisted of technical or analytical grade samples of known purity. Formulations of the chemicals were also tested when available. When purity of test chemicals was known, all calculated concentrations were based on percent active ingredients. Stock solutions were prepared immediately before each test, with commercial grade acetone as the carrier solvent. Occasionally, ethanol or dimethyl-formamide was substituted. Solvent concentrations did not exceed 0.5 mL/L in final dilution water. Test water (dilution water) was reconstituted from deionized water of at least 10 6 ohms resistivity by the addition of appropriate reagent grade chemicals (Marking 1969). Water was buffered to maintain a pH of 7.2 to 7.5, an alkalinity of 30 to 35 mg/L, and a hardness of 40 to 50 mg/L as CaCO 3 . Test water was mixed thoroughly and aerated before transfer into test chambers. Fish were acclimated to dilution water by gradually changing the water in acclimated tanks from 100% well water to 100% reconstituted water over a 1- to 3-day period at the desired testing temperature. Invertebrates were acclimated from well water to dilution water over a 4- to 6-h period. Toxicity tests were conducted under static conditions without aeration, and the organisms were not fed during acclimation or testing. Temperature of test solutions was maintained within ± 1°C of that required for a given test. Toxicity tests with fish were conducted in 18.9-liter (5-gal) wide-mouthed jars containing 15 liters of test solution. Fingerling fish weighing 0.2 to 1.5 g were tested at each concentration. Caution was taken not to exceed 0.8 g of test organisms per liter of solution. Duplicate test chambers were used to accommodate larger fish. Test chambers varied in size for invertebrates, depending on the species used; volume of test solution ranged from 0.25 to 4 liters. At least 10 organisms were exposed to each concentration for all definitive tests. At least six concentrations were used per toxicity test. The tests began upon initial exposure to the toxicant and continued for 96 h. Immobilization tests with invertebrates were conducted for only 48 h. The number of dead or affected organisms in each test chamber were recorded and the dead organisms were removed every 24 h; general observations on the condition of test organisms were also recorded at these times. Toxicity data were analyzed by a statistical method described by Litchfield and Wilcoxon (1949) to determine LC50 (theoretical estimate of the concentration lethal to 50% of the test animals) and 95% confidence intervals. This method is recommended by the American Public Health Association (1971) and by Sprague (1969) for determining median lethal concentrations. The procedure is easily modified for computing a single LC50 when replicate tests are performed.

Resource Publication↗