USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Fish and Wildlife Technical Report”

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

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
USGS1989

Techniques for shipboard surveys of marine birds

We describe shipboard and small boat techniques used by the US Fish and Wildlife Service in Alaska to survey marine birds at sea. The basis is a 10-min, 300-m-wide, strip transect taken from a platform moving at a constant speed in a constant direction. Special routines, such as instantaneous counts of traveling birds, are explained to help reduce biases caused by factors such as varying flight patterns, ship-following and avoidance, and patchy distributions. Data recording and coding techniques and formats, based on those developed for the National Oceanic Data Center, are described.

Fish and Wildlife Technical Report↗
USGS2005

Forestry practices and aquatic biodiversity: Fish

In the Pacific Northwest, fish communities are found in a diverse array of aquatic habitats ranging from the large coastal rivers of the temperate rainforests, to the fragmented and sometimes ephemeral streams of the xeric interior basins, and high-elevation streams and lakes in the mountainous areas (Rieman et al. 2003). Only high-elevation lakes and streams isolated above barriers to fish passage remained historically devoid of fish because they were never invaded following Pleistocene glaciation (Smith 1981). Despite this widespread distribution and once great population abundances, taxonomic diversity of fishes in these forested systems is naturally lower than in aquatic habitats in the eastern U.S. (Reeves, Bisson, and Dambacher 1998). Interactions among factors that influence species richness in aquatic systems (e.g., basin size, long-term stability of habitat, and barriers to colonization; Smith 1981) continue to influence the occurrence and persistence of fishes in these systems today. Consequently, the larger low-elevation rivers and estuaries support the greatest variety of fish species. In the high-elevation tributary streams, fish communities are less complex because these aquatic systems were less climatically and geologically stable, and fish populations were smaller and more prone to local extirpation. Furthermore, barriers to fish passage inhibited dispersal and colonization (Smith 1981). Streams in forested landscapes generally support salmon and trout, Oncorhynchus spp., whitefish Prosopium spp., sculpins Cottus spp., suckers Catostomus spp., and minnows (Cyprinidae), but in some of the colder streams, chars (e.g., Salvelinus confluentus and Salvelinus malma ) and lampreys (Petromyzontidae)may also occur (Rieman et al. 2003). Although biodiversity defined in terms of fish species richness is low in the Pacific Northwest, intraspecific variability is high, and polytypic fish species are common in the diverse aquatic habitats of the region. For example, the salmonids in the coastal rivers and streams, and the larger interconnected streams, rivers, and lakes of the interior exhibit a variety of ecotypes and migratory life histories (Healey 1986; Trotter 1989; Larson and McIntire 1993; Northcote 1997). This life-history variation appears to be associated with adaptation to spatial and temporal variation in environment (e.g., Schaffer and Elson 1975; Carl and Healey 1984; Beacham and Murray 1987), and there is some evidence of the genetic heritability of life-history traits (Carl and Healey 1984; Gharrett and Smoker 1993; Hankin, Nicholas, and Downey 1993). Persistence of any level of biological organization (e.g., life-history type, population, metapopulation, subspecies, species, community) is related to the interaction of environmental and biological components, and intraspecific diversity is a means of spreading risk ( sensu den Boer 1968) of extirpation in dynamic environments (Gresswell 1999). Unfortunately, despite the broad distribution and extensive intraspecific diversity, persistence of native fishes is uncertain in the Pacific Northwest. Many populations of anadromous salmonids, once synonymous with vigorous biological communities throughout the region, are threatened with extinction (Nehlsen, Williams, and Lichatowich 1991; Frissell 1993; Thurow, Lee, and Rieman 1997). Furthermore, over half of the native taxa in the Columbia River Basin are either listed under the Endangered Species Act, are being considered for listing, or are deemed sensitive by the management agencies (Lee et al. 1997; Thurow, Lee, and Rieman 1997). Potamodromous species like bull trout Salvelinus confluentus are estimated to occur as strong populations in less than 5% of their potential range (Rieman, Lee, and Thurow 1997). Although not currently listed under the endangered species list, the coastal cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus clarki is managed as a sensitive species in Oregon and California (Hall, Bisson, and Gresswell 1997). Native non-game fishes have rarely been monitored, but populations of species such as large-scale suckers ( Catostomus macrocheilus ), squawfish ( Ptychocheilus umpquae ), and Pacific lamprey ( Lampetra tridentata ) also are declining in some drainages (Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, unpublished data).

Pacific Northwest↗
USGS2008

Sources and implications of lead ammunition and fishing tackle on natural resources

A technical review of lead sources that originate from hunting, shooting sports, and fishing activities was undertaken by the American Fisheries Society and The Wildlife Society. The report addresses (1) sources of lead that originate from hunting, shooting sports, and fishing activities, (2) the hazard and risk that lead from these activities pose to natural resources, and (3) the management implications for fish and wildlife professionals and policy makers.

Wildlife Society Technical Review↗
USGS2019

Extreme coastal water level in Washington state: Guidance to support sea level rise planning

This document provides guidelines for assessing exposure to future coastal flooding during extreme coastal water level events – whether these are due to tides, surge, wave run-up, or, more likely, a combination of the three. These guidelines provide information about the current and future magnitude of extreme coastal water levels across Washington State and the underlying processes that influence them. This information is intended to be combined with sea level projections to assess future exposure to coastal flooding along Washington’s coastline. Although the results of our analyses can be combined with any available sea level projections, this report is intended as a companion to the localized sea level rise projections (Miller et al., 2018) developed as part of the Washington Coastal Resilience Project. The Washington Coastal Resilience Project was a three-year effort to rapidly increase the state’s capacity to prepare for sea level rise. The project aimed to improve risk projections, provide better guidelines for land use planners and strengthen capital investment programs for coastal restoration and infrastructure. Partners in the Washington Coastal Resilience Project included Washington Sea Grant, Washington Department of Ecology, Island County, King County, NOAA Office for Coastal Management, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Padilla Bay National Estuary Research Reserve, The City of Tacoma, The Nature Conservancy, U.S. Geological Survey, University of Oregon, University of Washington Climate Impacts Group, University of Washington Department of Earth and Space Sciences, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and Western Washington University. The 2018 sea level projections are described in an accompanying technical report, along with a review of the science related to sea level rise (Miller et al., 2018). The report and all associated supporting information are available on the Washington Coastal Hazards Resilience Network website (http://www.wacoastalnetwork.com/).

Washington↗
USGS2025

Decision analysis in support of the National Elk Refuge bison and elk management plan

Preface This report was developed to evaluate the performance of a set of proposed alternatives for Cervus elaphus canadensis (elk) and Bison bison (bison) management at the National Elk Refuge (NER) in Wyoming, U.S.A., and to inform a National Environmental Policy Act Environmental Impact Statement focused on developing the next “Bison and Elk Management Plan” (BEMP). The U.S. Geological Survey facilitated a structured decision-making process for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to develop the alternatives and the criteria (performance metrics) for evaluating the alternatives. Chapter A provides scoping details of the report, a summary of the 19 metrics that are used to evaluate the performance of each of 6 alternatives, and methodological details of 2 performance metrics that were not covered in other technical chapters. Chapter B analyzes elk population and chronic wasting disease dynamics under the five initial alternatives. Chapter C evaluates elk space-use based on data collected from global positioning system collars on elk and expert elicitation for scenarios with limited data. Chapter D evaluates bison population dynamics, conflict, and harvest patterns under the five initial alternatives. Chapter E assesses social and economic consequences. Chapter F is newly added to this superseding report and details the analysis and results of a new alternative that was developed after discussion among the lead and cooperating agencies working on the BEMP. The full set of six alternatives are anticipated to have varying affects on bison and elk population abundance and private land use, wildlife-related recreation and tourism, and hunters and outfitters in the region. Each chapter was developed under advisement of a technical team, made up science experts from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, and Wyoming Game and Fish Department.

Wyoming↗
USGS2025

Decision analysis in support of the National Elk Refuge bison and elk management plan

Preface This report was developed to evaluate the performance of a set of proposed alternatives for Cervus elaphus canadensis (elk) and Bison bison (bison) management at the National Elk Refuge (NER) in Wyoming, U.S.A., and to inform a National Environmental Policy Act Environmental Impact Statement focused on developing the next “Bison and Elk Management Plan” (BEMP). The U.S. Geological Survey facilitated a structured decision-making process for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to develop the alternatives and the criteria (performance metrics) for evaluating the alternatives. Chapter A provides scoping details of the report, a summary of the 19 metrics that are used to evaluate the performance of each of 5 alternatives, and methodological details of 2 performance metrics that were not covered in other technical chapters. Chapter B analyzes elk population and chronic wasting disease dynamics under the five alternatives. Chapter C evaluates elk space-use based on data collected from global positioning system collars on elk and expert elicitation for scenarios with limited data. Chapter D evaluates bison population dynamics, conflict, and harvest patterns under the five alternatives. Chapter E assesses social and economic consequences. The alternatives are anticipated to have varying affects on bison and elk population abundance and private land use, wildlife-related recreation and tourism, and hunters and outfitters in the region. Each chapter was developed under advisement of a technical team, made up science experts from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, and Wyoming Game and Fish Department.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS1989

Pentachlorophenol Hazards to Fish, Wildlife, and Invertebrates: A Synoptic Review

Pentachlorophenol (PCP) is now widely used as a wood preservative, and this has contributed to the detection of PCP residues in air, rain, groundwaters, surface waters, fish and aquatic invertebrates, and in human urine, blood, and milk of nursing mothers. This report briefly reviews the technical literature on ecological and toxicological aspects of PCP in the environment, with emphasis on fishery and wildlife resources. Subtopics include sources and uses, chemical properties, fate, background concentrations, lethal and sublethal effects, and current recommendations for resource protection

Contaminant Hazard Reviews↗
USGS2009

Fort Collins Science Center - Fiscal Year 2008 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 (USGS) Fort Collins Science Center (FORT) contribute a unique blend of ecological, socioeconomic, and technological expertise to investigating complicated ecological problems that address critical management questions. In Fiscal Year 2008 (FY08), FORT's scientific and technical professionals continued research vital to the science and management needs of U.S. Department of the Interior agencies and other entities. This annual report describes select FY08 accomplishments in research and technical assistance involving biological information management and delivery; aquatic, riparian, and managed-river ecosystems; invasive species; status and trends of biological resources (including human dimensions and social science); terrestrial ecosystems; and fish and wildlife resources.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2022

Contaminants of emerging concern in the Great Lakes: Science to inform management practices for protecting the health and integrity of wildlife populations from adverse effects: GLRI action plan I, focus area 1, goal 5

Executive Summary: Under Action Plan I (2010-2014) of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI), Federal and Academic partners began an investigation of the presence and distribution of contaminants of emerging concern (CECs) in the Great Lakes and potential impacts on fish and wildlife. The term CECs is applied to a broad range of chemicals that are currently in use but for which we currently lack good understanding of whether fish, wildlife, or humans are being exposed and/or whether negative health or environmental effects are expected if exposure occurs. Pharmaceuticals, personal care products, flame retardants, many current use pesticides, and poly- and perfluorinated chemicals are some well-known groups of CECs, but there is no definitive or comprehensive list that can be used to support the management of CECs to reduce impacts on the Great Lakes ecosystem. Four overarching goals were identified for this collaborative investigation: 1. Evaluate the sources, occurrence, and distribution of CECs across the Great Lakes Basin. 2. Examine associations between the distribution of CECs and land-use patterns. 3. Review both scientific literature and field-generated data to determine the potential for CECs to cause adverse effects on Great Lakes fish and wildlife populations. 4. Develop efficient strategies to survey and/or monitor for threats that CECs may pose in order to take effective management actions before those threats evolve into large scale impacts on Great Lakes ecosystems or the services they provide. Achievement of these goals ensures progress towards Focus Area 1: Toxic Substances and Areas of Concern from GLRI Action Plan I, Goal 5: “ The health and integrity of wildlife populations and habitat are protected from adverse chemical and biological effects associated with the presence of toxic substances in the Great Lakes Basin ”. This large-scale research effort was comprised of individual and collaborative projects from multiple federal agencies and academic institutions, involving over 85 investigators, and overseen by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 5, Great Lakes National Program Office. Partners include the United States Geological Survey, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Saint Cloud State University, the U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Key findings: 1. Contaminants of emerging concern were found throughout the monitored Great Lakes tributaries, but types and concentrations vary in association with regional land use. CECs were detected in nearly all samples collected. The type and concentration of the specific contaminants detected varied considerably among field sites and in association with land use type, such as urban, agricultural, wetland, 2 or forest. Contaminants were detected in the water column, sediment, and tissues of all species surveyed in the current work (mussels, aquatic insects, fish, and insect-eating birds). 2. There were over 20 contaminants for which CEC concentrations approached or exceeded those reported to cause toxicity in laboratory experiments. This was based on detection in water, sediments and or biota at one or more field sites. These contaminants represent compounds that warrant further investigation and monitoring with respect to potential impacts in certain areas of the Great Lakes basin. Based on the present investigation, compounds of greatest concern include: polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, associated with oil-based products and combustion of organic matter; atrazine, an herbicide; dichlorvos, an insecticide; and ibuprofen and venlafaxine, both pharmaceuticals. 3. Results suggest that mixtures of CECs presently found in most Great Lakes tributary locations surveyed may elicit subtle biological effects, but likely are not, alone, causing obvious detriment to current communities of fish and wildlife. CECs detected in the Great Lakes were associated with subtle biological effects like changes in gene expression, altered circulating glucose, etc. in both wild-caught and laboratory-reared organisms. These effects were generally not indicative of reproductive failure or mortality. However, the effects may have more serious implications when combined with other sources of stress like habitat degradation, changing climate conditions, and competition with invasive species. Due to limited historical data, it is unknown whether severe CEC-related impacts have already affected aquatic communities in waterbodies that have received long-term inputs of these contaminants. Likewise, under Action Plan I, biological effects were not necessarily evaluated at the sites where CEC concentrations exceeding laboratory toxicity thresholds were detected. As a result, strategic, ongoing surveillance and monitoring of CECs is warranted. This collaborative investigation resulted in new tools, approaches, and data that can be used to inform and support the management of CECs to reduce their impacts on Great Lakes natural resources. The following products of this research effort are available through https://communities.geoplatform.gov/glri/ or by contacting the investigators (see technical chapters found in Appendices A-F): 1. Database of CEC occurrence and concentrations in US tributary streams. The database includes CEC detections in water, sediment, and fish and wildlife tissues, and represents the most comprehensive survey of CECs in the Great Lakes Region. 2. Synopses of results and key findings. Integrated summaries of results, conclusions, and management implications of the CEC research are available through reports, topical fact sheets, and presentations. 3. Technical publications: This collaborative research effort has resulted in over 50 peer-reviewed publications, agency reports, and data releases that can be of use to resource managers, the scientific community, and members of the public. 4. Innovative tools. Innovative monitoring devices, sampling equipment, conceptual frameworks, and software applications were developed over the course of this 3 research. These tools are transferable to stakeholders via internet accessibility or via specifications, instructions, and demonstration detailed in technical publications. Hypotheses to guide CECs research under Action Plan II. Findings from 2010-2014 were used to guide further research in 2015-2018 for basin-wide surveillance of CECs and for sites warranting further study of potential biological impacts of CECs. Additional surveillance included both evaluation of additional classes of contaminants and expanded lists for chemical classes shown to be of greatest concern. Mixtures of some of the most frequently detected contaminants were also tested in laboratory studies to understand whether long term exposures to multiple contaminants may result in effects not evident from uncontrolled, short-term field experiments.

Great Lakes↗
USGS2019

Scientific Framework for resilience research on the Upper Mississippi River System

The goal of this research framework is to outline research that would continue to improve our understanding of ecological resilience of the Upper Mississippi River System (UMRS) and inform management of the system for health and resilience. We provide a broad overview of recently completed and ongoing work that has been funded as a part of the UMRS Ecological Resilience Assessment and related efforts to provide context for how proposed research questions build upon our current knowledge and may inform restoration planning and design. We describe two primary objectives within this research framework - the first objective is to investigate hypothesized drivers and feedbacks related to specified resilience, and the second is to expand our utility of general resilience indicators through further development and evaluation. The intended audience for this framework is the Upper Mississippi River Restoration Program (UMRR). The UMRR partnership is made up of natural resource agencies from five states (Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri and Wisconsin) and five federal agencies (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Geological Survey, and USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service).

Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Wisconsin↗
USGS2010

Status and trends of native birds in the Keauhou and Kilauea forest, Hawai`i Island

A Safe Harbor Agreement (SHA) is a voluntary arrangement between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and non-Federal landowners to promote the protection, conservation, and recovery of listed species without imposing further land use restrictions on the landowners. Kamehameha Schools is considering entering into a SHA for their Keauhou and Kīlauea Forest lands on the island of Hawai′i. Bird surveys were conducted in 2008 to determine the current occurrence and density of listed species for the Keauhou and Kīlauea Forest, a prerequisite for establishing an agreement. Because of different management practices in the proposed SHA area we stratified the survey data into intact and altered forest strata. The listed passerines—′Akiapōlā′au (Hemignathus munroi), Hawai′i Creeper (Oreomystis mana), and Hawai′i ′Ākepa (Loxops coccineus)—occur in both strata but at low densities. The endangered ′Io (Hawaiian Hawk; Buteo solitarius) also occurs within both strata at low densities. This report was prepared for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Kamehameha Schools to provide information they can use to establish baseline levels for the SHA. In addition, we describe the status and trends of the non-listed native birds.

Hawaii↗
USGS2000

A comprehensive review of Farm Bill contributions to wildlife conservation, 1985-2000

A comprehensive review of the scientific literature was undertaken to determine wildlife responses to programs established under the conservation title of the 1985 Food Security Act as amended in 1990 and 1996 (Farm Bill). Literature was annotated and summaries of wildlife responses were provided for the Conservation Reserve Program CRP, Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP), Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP) and Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). The report recognized that Farm Bill conservation programs were created to serve many purposes. Foremost among these purposes was to enable Americaa??s farmers and ranchers to be better stewards of their lands. In general, wildlife responded positively to improvements in land stewardship, particularly when the needs of wildlife were considered in conservation planning and implementation. Whereas authors acknowledged that their understanding of wildlife responses to Farm Bill conservation programs was still incomplete, they concluded that these programs were making significant contributions toward conservation of the nationa??s fish and wildlife resources.

Technical Report↗
USGS2019

U.S. Geological Survey — Department of the Interior Region 11, Alaska—2019 annual science report

In keeping with our national mission, the USGS in Alaska provides timely and objective scientific information to help the Nation address issues and solve problems in five major topical areas (listed alphabetically): Energy and Minerals; Geospatial Mapping; Natural Hazards; Water Quality, Streamflow, and Ice Dynamics; and Wildlife, Fish, and Habitat. The USGS in Alaska engages about 400 scientists and support staff working in three major science centers, Cooperative Research Units, and USGS centers outside Alaska, with a combined annual science budget of about $60 million. In just the last 5 years, the USGS in Alaska has produced scientific benefits resulting from more than 1,000 publications and about 250 technical reports. Publications relevant to Alaska can be conveniently searched by keyword through the USGS Publications Warehouse at https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/search?q=Alaska .

Alaska↗
USGS2012

Lateral and vertical channel movement and potential for bed-material movement on the Madison River downstream from Earthquake Lake, Montana

The 1959 Hebgen Lake earthquake caused a massive landslide (Madison Slide) that dammed the Madison River and formed Earthquake Lake. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers excavated a spillway through the Madison Slide to permit outflow from Earthquake Lake. In June 1970, high streamflows on the Madison River severely eroded the spillway channel and damaged the roadway embankment along U.S. Highway 287 downstream from the Madison Slide. Investigations undertaken following the 1970 flood events concluded that substantial erosion through and downstream from the spillway could be expected for streamflows greater than 3,500 cubic feet per second (ft 3 /s). Accordingly, the owners of Hebgen Dam, upstream from Earthquake Lake, have tried to manage releases from Hebgen Lake to prevent streamflows from exceeding 3,500 ft 3 /s measured at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) gaging station 0638800 Madison River at Kirby Ranch, near Cameron, Montana. Management of flow releases from Hebgen Lake to avoid exceeding the threshold streamflow at USGS gaging station 06038800 is difficult, and has been questioned for two reasons. First, no road damage was reported downstream from the Earthquake Lake outlet in 1993, 1996, and 1997 when streamflows exceeded the 3,500-ft 3 /s threshold. Second, the 3,500-ft 3 /s threshold generally precludes releases of higher flows that could be beneficial to the blue-ribbon trout fishery downstream in the Madison River. In response to concerns about minimizing streamflow downstream from Earthquake Lake and the possible armoring of the spillway, the USGS, in cooperation with the Madison River Fisheries Technical Advisory Committee (MADTAC; Bureau of Land Management; Montana Department of Environmental Quality; Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks; PPL-Montana; U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service - Gallatin National Forest; and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service), conducted a study to determine movement of the Madison River channel downstream from Earthquake Lake and to investigate the potential for bed material movement along the same reach. The purpose of this report is to present information about the lateral and vertical movement of the Madison River from 1970 to 2006 for a 1-mile reach downstream from Earthquake Lake and for Raynolds Pass Bridge, and to provide an analysis of the potential for bed-material movement so that MADTAC can evaluate the applicability of the previously determined threshold streamflow for initiation of damaging erosion. As part of this study channel cross sections originally surveyed by the USGS in 1971 were resurveyed in 2006. Incremental channel-movement distances were determined by comparing the stream centerlines from 14 aerial photographs taken between 1970 and 2006. Depths of channel incision and aggregation were determined by comparing the 2006 and 1971 cross-section and water-surface data. Particle sizes of bed and bank materials were measured in 2006 and 2008 using the pebble-count method and sieve analyses. A one-dimensional hydraulic-flow model (HEC-RAS) was used to calculate mean boundary-shear stresses for various streamflows; these calculated boundary-shear stresses were compared to calculated critical-shear stresses for the bed materials to determine the potential for bed-material movement. A comparison of lateral channel movement distances with annual peak streamflows shows that streamflows higher than the 3,500-ft 3 /s threshold were followed by lateral channel movement except from 1991 to 1992 and possibly from 1996 to 1997. However, it was not possible to discern whether the channel moved gradually or suddenly, or in response to one peak flow, to several peak flows, or to sustained flows. The channel moved between 2002 and 2005 even when streamflows were less than the threshold streamflow of 3,500 ft 3 /s. Comparisons of cross sections and aerial photographs show that the channel has moved laterally and incised and aggraded to varying degrees. The channel has developed meander bends and has incised as much as 5–12 feet (ft) through the upstream part of the Madison Slide (cross sections 1400–800). Near cross section 800, the stream has eroded into the steep right bank between the stream and the road where fill was mechanically placed after 1970. Channel movement also was noted downstream from the Madison Slide. Near Raynolds Pass Bridge, about 3 miles (mi) downstream from Earthquake Lake, elevations across the channel have changed by -1.4 ft to +1.9 ft, but these changes were local in nature and could represent a few rocks or depressions in the bed. Overall, it does not appear that the materials eroded from the Madison Slide are causing aggradation in the subreach near the Raynolds Pass Bridge. Comparisons of critical shear stresses to mean boundary-shear stresses indicate that the D50 particle sizes (median size) along the right side of the bed between cross sections 400 and 500 and along the right side of the bed between cross sections 1300 and 1400 could move at the threshold streamflow. In contrast, most of the D84 particle sizes at those two locations probably will not move at the threshold streamflow. This lack of movement for the larger particles at the threshold streamflow could lead to further armoring of the bed as the D50 and smaller-sized particles are removed from the bed and transported downstream. The Shields parameter values from 0.04 to 0.08 that were used to calculate critical shear stresses could be conservative for a high-gradient stream such as the Madison. A higher, less conservative, Shields parameter would result in higher critical shear stresses, meaning that higher streamflows would be required to move material than those reported herein. In addition, because materials in the channel thalweg are exposed to higher boundary-shear stresses than the materials along the sides of the channel, larger, more erosion-resistant materials likely exist in the deeper parts of the channel where high-flow depths and velocities prevented sediment sampling. Movement of these materials might require higher critical shear stresses than estimated in this report. Characterization of sediment sizes in the center of the stream and observation of bed-material movement for a range of streamflows could provide information to help refine the Shields parameter and critical-shear stress estimates for bed materials in the Madison River downstream from Earthquake Lake. Furthermore, resurveying cross sections and water-surface elevations more frequently (either annually or after high streamflows) could better define the relation between streamflow and lateral and vertical channel movement.

Montana↗
USGS1991

Evaluation of the instream flow incremental methodology by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service field users

This paper summarizes results of a survey conducted in 1988 of 57 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service field offices. The purpose was to document opinions of biologists experienced in applying the Instream Flow Incremental Methodology (IFIM). Responses were received from 35 offices where 616 IFIM applications were reported. The existence of six monitoring studies designed to evaluate the adequacy of flows provided at sites was confirmed. The two principal categories reported as stumbling blocks to the successful application of IFIM were beliefs that the methodology is technically too simplistic or that it is too complex to apply. Recommendations receiving the highest scores for future initiatives to enhance IFIM use were (1) training and workshops for field biologists; and (2) improving suitability index (SI) curves and computer models, and evaluating the relationship of weighted useable area (WUA) to fish responses. The authors concur that emphasis for research should be on addressing technical concerns about SI curves and WUA.

Fisheries↗
USGS1998

Contaminant Hazard Reviews. [Reports No. 1-28 on CD-ROM.]

This compact disc (CD) contains the first 28 reports in the Contaminant Hazard Reviews (CHR) that were published originally between 1985 and 1994 in the U.S. Department of the Interior Biological Report series. The CD was produced because printed supplies of these reviews--a total of 84,000--became exhausted and demand remained high. Each review was prepared at the request of environmental specialists of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and each contained specific information on mirex, cadmium, carbofuran, toxaphene, selenium, chromium, polychlorinated biphenyls, dioxins, diazinon, mercury, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, arsenic, chlorpyrifos, lead, tin, index issue, pentachlorophenol, atrazine, molybdenum, boron, chlordane, paraquat, cyanide, fenvalerate, diflubenzuron, zinc, famphur, or acrolein. Each report reviewed and synthesized the technical literature on a single contaminant and its effects on terrestrial plants and invertebrates, aquatic plants and animals, avian and mammalian wildlife, and other natural resources. The subtopics include contaminant sources and uses; physical, chemical, and metabolic properties; concentrations in field collections of abiotic materials and living organisms; deficiency effects, where appropriate; lethal and sublethal effects, including effects on survival, growth, reproduction, metabolism, mutagenicity, teratogenicity, and carcinogenicity; proposed criteria for the protection of human health and sensitive natural resources; and recommendations for additional research.

Book↗
USGS2017

Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units - A model partnership program

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units (CRU) program is a unique model of cooperative partnership among the USGS, other U.S. Department of the Interior and Federal agencies, universities, State fish and wildlife agencies, and the Wildlife Management Institute. These partnerships are maintained as one of the USGS’s strongest links to Federal and State land and natural resource management agencies. Established in 1935 to meet the need for trained professionals in the growing field of wildlife management, the program currently consists of 40 Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units located on university campuses in 38 States and supports 119 research scientist positions when fully funded. The threefold mission of the CRU program is to (1) conduct scientific research for the management of fish, wildlife, and other natural resources; (2) provide technical assistance to natural resource managers in the application of scientific information to natural resource policy and management; and (3) train future natural resource professionals.

Fact Sheet↗