USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Forest Policy and Economics”

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.

27 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

Evidence and implications of recent and projected climate change in Alaska's forest ecosystems

The structure and function of Alaska's forests have changed significantly in response to a changing climate, including alterations in species composition and climate feedbacks (e.g., carbon, radiation budgets) that have important regional societal consequences and human feedbacks to forest ecosystems. In this paper we present the first comprehensive synthesis of climate-change impacts on all forested ecosystems of Alaska, highlighting changes in the most critical biophysical factors of each region. We developed a conceptual framework describing climate drivers, biophysical factors and types of change to illustrate how the biophysical and social subsystems of Alaskan forests interact and respond directly and indirectly to a changing climate. We then identify the regional and global implications to the climate system and associated socio-economic impacts, as presented in the current literature. Projections of temperature and precipitation suggest wildfire will continue to be the dominant biophysical factor in the Interior-boreal forest, leading to shifts from conifer- to deciduous-dominated forests. Based on existing research, projected increases in temperature in the Southcentral- and Kenai-boreal forests will likely increase the frequency and severity of insect outbreaks and associated wildfires, and increase the probability of establishment by invasive plant species. In the Coastal-temperate forest region snow and ice is regarded as the dominant biophysical factor. With continued warming, hydrologic changes related to more rapidly melting glaciers and rising elevation of the winter snowline will alter discharge in many rivers, which will have important consequences for terrestrial and marine ecosystem productivity. These climate-related changes will affect plant species distribution and wildlife habitat, which have regional societal consequences, and trace-gas emissions and radiation budgets, which are globally important. Our conceptual framework facilitates assessment of current and future consequences of a changing climate, emphasizes regional differences in biophysical factors, and points to linkages that may exist but that currently lack supporting research. The framework also serves as a visual tool for resource managers and policy makers to develop regional and global management strategies and to inform policies related to climate mitigation and adaptation.

Alaska↗

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↗

Federal research on the conservation of migratory nongame birds in the United States

In the United States, the term 'nongame birds' applies to all bird species that are neither hunted nor legalIy endangered or threatened. Although ultimate responsibility for protection of migratory nongame birds lies with the federal government, research and management efforts by the key federal landholding agencies have historically emphasized species of economic importance, game birds and endangered species. In response to various legislative actions between the late 1960s and early 1980s, however, there has been a gradual escalation of research directed towards conservation of migratory nongame birds in these agencies. These studies have focused on two broad objectives (a) development of population sampling and census methods, and (b) identifying habitat requirements of species and species groups and the impacts of habitat changes on populations. The bulk of this research has been conducted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Forest Service. In this paper, the missions and research structures of these agencies are described briefly, and selected research highlights are discussed at length. Specific examples are development of the Breeding Bird Survey and teasing apart the relative contributions of forest fragmentation on breeding and wintering grounds to declines in populations of Neotropical migrants. Nongame bird research activities in other agencies are also summarized. The cumulative research conducted to date is evaluated in the context of developing a national management strategy to meet future migratory nongame bird conservation needs. Important shortcomings in present federal programmes continue to be insufficient folIow-through from research results to direct management action and lack of coordination among agencies with a vested interest in nongame bird conservation. Pending legislation and recent maturation of a comprehensive migratory nongame bird policy in the Fish and Wildlife Service are indications that significant improvements in these areas can be expected.

Book chapter↗

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↗

Multi-scale 46-year remote sensing change detection of diamond mining and land cover in a conflict and post-conflict setting

The town of Tortiya was created in the rural northern region of Côte d′Ivoire in the late 1940s to house workers for a new diamond mine. Nearly three decades later, the closure of the industrial-scale diamond mine in 1975 did not diminish the importance of diamond profits to the region's economy, and resulted in the growth of artisanal and small-scale diamond mining (ASM) within the abandoned industrial-scale mining concession. In the early 2000s, the violent conflict that arose in Côte d′Ivoire highlighted the importance of ASM land use to the local economy, but also brought about international concerns that diamond profits were being used to fund the rebellion. In recent years, cashew plantations have expanded exponentially in the region, diversifying economic activity, but also creating the potential for conflict between diamond mining and agricultural land uses. As the government looks to address the future of Tortiya and this potential conflict, a detailed spatio-temporal understanding of the changes in these two land uses over time may assist in informing policymaking. Remotely sensed imagery presents an objective and detailed spatial record of land use/land cover (LULC), and change detection methods can provide quantitative insight regarding regional land cover trends. However, the vastly different scales of ASM and cashew orchards present a unique challenge to comprehensive understanding of land use change in the region. In this study, moderate-scale categories of LULC, including cashew orchards, uncultivated forest, urban space, mining/ bare, and mixed vegetation, were produced through supervised classification of Landsat multispectral imagery from 1984, 1991, 2000, 2007, and 2014. The fine-scale ASM land use was identified through manual interpretation of annually acquired high resolution satellite imagery. Corona imagery was also integrated into the study to extend the temporal duration of the remote sensing record back to the period of industrial-scale mining. These different-scale analyses were then integrated to create a record of 46 years of mining activity and land cover change in Tortiya. While similar in spatial extent, the mining/ bare class in the integrated analysis exhibits a substantially different spatial distribution than in the original classifications. This additional information regarding the locations of ASM activity in the Tortiya area is important from a policy and planning perspective. The results of this study also suggest that LULC classifications of Landsat imagery do not consistently capture areas of ASM in the Côte d′Ivoire landscape.

Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environme↗

Multi-resource analysis: A proof of concept study of natural resource tradeoffs in the Piceance Basin, Colorado, using the net resources assessment (NetRA) decision support tool

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is developing a multi-resource analysis (MRA) line of products to inform land-use decision makers. Specifically, MRA products will integrate scientific information, include considerations for natural resource interrelations, and quantify the effects of resource management decisions in biophysical, economic, and societal terms. As part of the establishment of the MRA, the USGS, in collaboration with the University of New Mexico, has developed the Net Resources Assessment (NetRA) decision support tool. As a proof of concept analysis, the NetRA was applied to the Piceance basin in Colorado in a hypothetical example to illustrate how resource managers could use the NetRA to consider tradeoffs of natural resources among alternative development plans and land cover patterns within a geographic region. The NetRA is a policy-relevant approach to assess the availability of multiple natural resources. It is an analytical toolset that may be used to examine the spatiotemporal relations between development of energy and mineral resources and delivery of biological natural resources. The NetRA operates at multiple map scales and contains a set of integrated, compatible submodels with specific data requirements for natural resource stocks, engineering economics, biophysical, and ecological data for ecosystem services stocks, market prices, regulations, and nonmarket values. The NetRA includes an explicit process to consider the interdependence between development and conservation, which is a crucial consideration in land-management and land-use decisions. The NetRA is used to estimate an expected net resource value (NRV). The NRV is the expected, present value, economic benefit from the extraction of a resource (for example, natural gas) minus the total cost of production, which is the aggregation of the development, production, and social costs. Social costs include private costs plus any external costs. There can be external social benefits associated with natural gas production, such as increased demand for locally produced goods and increased employment in the local area through backward and forward linkages of natural gas production. The NRV is used to compare development outcomes (scenarios) from a range of exploration and development plans for cumulative energy production. The Piceance basin application of the NetRA uses the NRV to assess the tradeoff between continuous natural gas extraction and the effects to the local populations of Odocoileus hemionus (mule deer) and aquatic species and to consumptive water uses for an area the size and resolution of a USGS energy resource assessment unit. In the proof of concept simulation, the 2.9-square-mile-area of USGS oil and gas assessment unit 50200263 (Piceance basin continuous gas unit of the Mesaverde Total Petroleum System) was gridded into 588 cells. From this area, seven clusters with potential for development and three that cannot be developed were identified; the three clusters that cannot be developed were identified as wilderness study areas, areas of critical environmental concern, and national forests. On the basis of these criteria, there are 118 cells unsuitable for development in the oil and gas assessment unit: 84 are in national forests, 23 are areas of critical environmental concern, and 11 are wilderness study areas. The remaining cells in the oil and gas assessment unit can be developed on both private and public lands. Two scenarios were considered that are distinguished as plan 1 and plan 2. Plan 1 keeps the amount of land disturbance unchanged and limits the number of development locations to 140 grid cells for the production period, which constrains the amount of the energy resources available for development; the plan requires the usage of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) unsuitability criteria. Plan 2 also limits the number of development locations to 140 grid cells for the production period but provides a constant volume of energy production by increasing the density of well pads within the cells. The effects of plan 2 to the NRV when there are five wells per pad and five pads per square mile happen mostly in the first 5 years of development, even though the effects on the population of mule deer continue in later years. This outcome is the result of the upfront development and investment costs and the initial effect to the ecosystem services.

Colorado↗

Managing effects of drought and other water resource challenges in Alaska and the Pacific Northwest

This is a Cooperator Report. As such, there is no specific abstract. The physical, ecological, and social environments of Alaska and the Pacific Northwest (PNW) region of the United States are extremely diverse. Alaska ranges from the Arctic Ocean and the very cold, dry environments of the North Slope to the cool and very rainy coastal North Pacific region of Southeast Alaska. Most precipitation falls as snow at higher elevations. In Arctic Alaska, average annual temperature is 14.6 F, and average annual precipitation is 11 inches. By contrast, in Southeast Alaska, average annual temperature is 35.8 F, and annual average precipitation is 143 inches. The PNW, defined here as Idaho, Oregon, and Washington, ranges from the Pacific Coast (annual precipitation of 200 inches) to interior semi-arid regions (annual precipitation of 8 inches). Precipitation patterns in the PNW are strongly governed by orographic phenomena, with high, persistent snowpack in the higher mountains (e.g., record annual snowfall of 1,130 in at Mount Baker, Washington in 1999-2000). Ecosystems in the PNW include productive temperate coniferous forests near the Pacific coast and along the (wet) west slope of the Cascade Range, less productive mixed-conifer forest along the (dry) east slope of the Cascades and in interior mountain ranges, and sagebrush-steppe and shrublands at lower elevations in much of the interior and mountain valleys. Large rivers and thousands of smaller tributaries form an extensive network of riparian, wetland, and estuarine systems that provide both critical hydrologic function and biological diversity at broad and fine spatial scales. Although Alaska and the Pacific Northwest differ in important physical, ecological, and social features, the importance of natural resources is evident in both regions. Water is important for wildlife and people. Water provides critical habitat for salmon, which are culturally and economically valuable species. Timber production has declined in recent decades. Recreation has emerged as a major revenue source.

Alaska, Oregon, Washington↗

Global Cropland Area Database (GCAD) derived from Remote Sensing in Support of Food Security in the Twenty-first Century: Current Achievements and Future Possibilities

The precise estimation of the global agricultural cropland- extents, areas, geographic locations, crop types, cropping intensities, and their watering methods (irrigated or rainfed; type of irrigation) provides a critical scientific basis for the development of water and food security policies (Thenkabail et al., 2012, 2011, 2010). By year 2100, the global human population is expected to grow to 10.4 billion under median fertility variants or higher under constant or higher fertility variants (Table 1) with over three quarters living in developing countries, in regions that already lack the capacity to produce enough food. With current agricultural practices, the increased demand for food and nutrition would require in about 2 billion hectares of additional cropland, about twice the equivalent to the land area of the United States, and lead to significant increases in greenhouse gas productions (Tillman et al., 2011). For example, during 1960-2010 world population more than doubled from 3 billion to 7 billion. The nutritional demand of the population also grew swiftly during this period from an average of about 2000 calories per day per person in 1960 to nearly 3000 calories per day per person in 2010. The food demand of increased population along with increased nutritional demand during this period (1960-2010) was met by the “green revolution” which more than tripled the food production; even though croplands decreased from about 0.43 ha/capita to 0.26 ha/capita (FAO, 2009). The increase in food production during the green revolution was the result of factors such as: (a) expansion in irrigated areas which increased from 130 Mha in 1960s to 278.4 Mha in year 2000 (Siebert et al., 2006) or 399 Mha when you do not consider cropping intensity (Thenkabail et al., 2009a, 2009b, 2009c) or 467 Mha when you consider cropping intensity (Thenkabail et al., 2009a; Thenkabail et al., 2009c); (b) increase in yield and per capita food production (e.g., cereal production from 280 kg/person to 380 kg/person and meat from 22 kg/person to 34 kg/person (McIntyre, 2008); (c) new cultivar types (e.g., hybrid varieties of wheat and rice, biotechnology); and (d) modern agronomic and crop management practices (e.g., fertilizers, herbicide, pesticide applications). However, some of the factors that lead to the green revolution have stressed the environment to limits leading to salinization and decreasing water quality. For example, from 1960 to 2000, the phosphorous use doubled from 10 million tons to 20 MT, pesticide use tripled from near zero to 3 MT, and nitrogen use as fertilizer increased to a staggering 80 MT from just 10 MT (Foley et al., 2007; Khan and Hanjra, 2008). Further, diversion of croplands to bio-fuels is already taking water away from food production; the economics, carbon sequestration, environmental, and food security impacts of biofuel production are net negative (Lal and Pimentel, 2009), leaving us with a carbon debt (Gibbs et al., 2008; Searchinger et al., 2008). Climate models predict that in most regions of the world the hottest seasons on record will become the norm by the end of the century-an outcome that bodes ill for feeding the world (Kumar and Singh, 2005). Also, crop yield increases of the green revolution era have now stagnated (Hossain et al., 2005). Thereby, further increase in food production through increase in cropland areas and\or increased allocations of water for croplands are widely considered unsustainable and\or infeasible. Indeed, cropland areas have even begun to decrease in many 3 parts of the World due to factors such as urbanization, industrialization, and salinization. Furthermore, ecological and environmental imperatives such as biodiversity conservation and atmospheric carbon sequestration have put a cap on the possible expansion of cropland areas to other lands such as forests and rangelands. Other important factors limit food security. These include factors such as diversion of croplands to biofuels (Bindraban et al., 2009), limited water resources for irrigation expansion (Turral et al., 2009), limits on agricultural intensifications, loss of croplands to urbanization (Khan and Hanjra, 2008), increasing meat consumption (and associated demands on land and water) (Vinnari and Tapio, 2009), environmental infeasibility for cropland expansion (Gordon et al., 2009), and changing climate have all put pressure on our continued ability to sustain global food security in the twenty-first century. So, how does the World continue to meet its food and nutrition needs?. Solutions may come from bio-technology and precision farming, however developments in these fields are not currently moving at rates that will ensure global food security over next few decades. Further, there is a need for careful consideration of possible harmful effects of bio-technology. We should not be looking back 30– 50 years from now, like we have been looking back now at many mistakes made during the green revolution. During the green revolution the focus was only on getting more yield per unit area. Little thought was put about serious damage done to our natural environments, water resources, and human health as a result of detrimental factors such as uncontrolled use of herbicides-pesticides-nutrients, drastic groundwater mining, and salinization of fertile soils due to over irrigation. Currently, there is talk of a “second green revolution” or even an “ever green revolution”, but clear ideas on what these terms actually mean are still debated and are evolving. One of the biggest issues that are not given adequate focus is the use of large quantities of water for food production. Indeed, an overwhelming proportion (60-90%) of all human water use in India goes for producing their food (Falkenmark, M., & Rockström, 2006). But such intensive water use for food production is no longer tenable due to increasing pressure for water use alternatives such as increasing urbanization, industrialization, environmental flows, bio-fuels, and recreation. This has brought into sharp focus the need to grow more food per drop of water leading to a “blue revolution”

Book chapter↗

The United States National Climate Assessment - Alaska Technical Regional Report

The Alaskan landscape is changing, both in terms of effects of human activities as a consequence of increased population, social and economic development and their effects on the local and broad landscape; and those effects that accompany naturally occurring hazards such as volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, and tsunamis. Some of the most prevalent changes, however, are those resulting from a changing climate, with both near term and potential upcoming effects expected to continue into the future. Alaska's average annual statewide temperatures have increased by nearly 4°F from 1949 to 2005, with significant spatial variability due to the large latitudinal and longitudinal expanse of the State. Increases in mean annual temperature have been greatest in the interior region, and smallest in the State's southwest coastal regions. In general, however, trends point toward increases in both minimum temperatures, and in fewer extreme cold days. Trends in precipitation are somewhat similar to those in temperature, but with more variability. On the whole, Alaska saw a 10-percent increase in precipitation from 1949 to 2005, with the greatest increases recorded in winter. The National Climate Assessment has designated two well-established scenarios developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Nakicenovic and others, 2001) as a minimum set that technical and author teams considered as context in preparing portions of this assessment. These two scenarios are referred to as the Special Report on Emissions Scenarios A2 and B1 scenarios, which assume either a continuation of recent trends in fossil fuel use (A2) or a vigorous global effort to reduce fossil fuel use (B1). Temperature increases from 4 to 22°F are predicted (to 2070-2099) depending on which emissions scenario (A2 or B1) is used with the least warming in southeast Alaska and the greatest in the northwest. Concomitant with temperature changes, by the end of the 21st century the growing season is expected to lengthen by 15-25 days in some areas of Alaska, with much of that corresponding with earlier spring snow melt. Future projections of precipitation (30-80 years) over Alaska show an increase across the State, with the largest changes in the northwest and smallest in the southeast. Because of increasing temperatures and growing season length, however, increased precipitation may not correspond with increased water availability, due to temperature related increased evapotranspiration. The extent of snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere has decreased by about 10 percent since the late 1960s, with stronger trends noted since the late 1980s. Alaska has experienced similar trends, with a strong decrease in snow cover extent occurring in May. When averaged across the State, the disappearance of snow in the spring has occurred from 4 to 6 days earlier per decade, and snow return in fall has occurred approximately 2 days later per decade. This change appears to be driven by climate warming rather than a decrease in winter precipitation, with average winter temperatures also increasing by about 2.5°F. The extent of sea ice has been declining, as has been widely published in both national and scientific media outlets, and is projected to continue to decline during this century. The observed decline in annual sea ice minimum extent (September) has occurred more rapidly than was predicted by climate models and has been accompanied by decreases in ice thickness and in the presence of multi-year ice. This decrease was first documented by satellite imagery in the late 1970s for the Bering and Chukchi Seas, and is projected to continue, with the potential for the disappearance of summer sea ice by mid- to late century. A new phenomenon that was not reported in previous assessments is ocean acidification. Uptake of carbon dioxide (CO2) by oceans has a significant effect on marine biogeochemistry by reducing seawater pH. Ocean acidification is of particular concern in Alaska, because cold sea water absorbs CO2 more rapidly than warm water, and a decrease in sea ice extent has allowed increased sea surface exposure and more uptake of CO2 into these northern waters. Ocean acidification will likely affect the ability of organisms to produce and maintain shell material, such as aragonite or calcite (calcium carbonate minerals structured from carbonate ions), required by many shelled organism, from mollusks to corals to microscopic organisms at the base of the food chain. Direct biological effects in Alaska further along the food chain have yet to be studied and may vary among organisms. Some of the potentially most significant changes to Alaska that could result from a changing climate are the effects on the terrestrial cryosphere - particularly glaciers and permafrost. Alaskan glaciers are changing at a rapid rate, the primary driver appearing to be temperature. Statewide, glaciers lost 13 cubic miles of ice annually from the 1950s to the 1990s, and that rate doubled in the 2000s. However, like temperature and precipitation, glacier ice loss is not spatially uniform; most glaciers are losing mass, yet some are growing (for example Hubbard Glacier in southeast Alaska). Alaska glaciers with the most rapid loss are those terminating in sea water or lakes. With this increasing rate of melt, the contribution of surplus fresh water entering into the oceans from Alaska's glaciers, as well as those in neighboring British Columbia, Canada, is approximately 20 percent of that contributed by the Greenland Ice Sheet. Permafrost degradation (that is, the thawing of ice-rich soils) is currently (2012) impacting infrastructure and surface-water availability in areas of both discontinuous and continuous ground ice. Over most of the State, the permafrost is warming, with increasing temperatures broadly consistent with increasing air temperatures. On the Arctic coastal plain of Alaska, permafrost temperatures showed some cooling in the 1950s and 1960s but have been followed by a roughly 5°F increase since the 1980s. Many areas in the continuous permafrost zone have seen increases in temperature in the seasonally active layer and a decrease in re-freezing rates. Changes in the discontinuous permafrost zone are initially much more observable due to the resulting thermokarst terrain (land surface formed as ice rich permafrost thaws), most notable in boreal forested areas. Climate warming in Alaska has potentially broad implications for human health and food security, especially in rural areas, as well as increased risk for injury with changing winter ice conditions. Additionally, such warming poses the potential for increasing damage to existing water and sanitation facilities and challenges for development of new facilities, especially in areas underlain by permafrost. Non-infectious and infectious diseases also are becoming an increasing concern. For example, from 1999 to 2006 there was a statistically significant increase in medical claims for insectbite reactions in five of six regions of Alaska, with the largest percentage increase occurring in the most northern areas. The availability and quality of subsistence foods, normally considered to be very healthy, may change due to changing access, changing habitats, and spoilage of meat in food storage cellars. These and other trends and potential outcomes resulting from a changing climate are further described in this report. In addition, we describe new science leadership activities that have been initiated to address and provide guidance toward conducting research aimed at making available information for policy makers and land management agencies to better understand, address, and plan for changes to the local and regional environment. This report cites data in both metric and standard units due to the contributions by numerous authors and the direct reference of their data.

Alaska↗