USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Natural Resources and Environmental Issues”

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
USGS1995

Oil, biological communities and contingency planning

The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 mandates the inclusion of a fish and wildlife response plan in the National Contingency Plan (NCP) and the creation of Area Committees that must develop an Area Contingency Plan (ACP). Area Contingency Plans must include a detailed annex containing a Fish and Wildlife and Sensitive Environments Plan. Tank vessels, offshore facilities, and certain onshore facilities must have response plans consistent with the requirements of the NCP and the ACP. New regulations to supersede the Type A and B procedures of the Natural Resources Damage Assessment Regulations are being developed for oil spills. Currently, four assessment methods have been proposed: (1) Type A, (2) comprehensive (Type B), (3) intermediate (between types A and B), and (4) compensation tables. The Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund is approaching its ceiling of $1 billion, but only $50 million has been appropriated. Effective biological contingency planning requires extensive knowledge of (1) the environmental fate of petroleum, (2) the effects of petroleum on organisms, (3) the existing biological resources, and (4) the establishment of a system of biological priorities. The characteristics and fate of petroleum and the biological effects of petroleum are reviewed. Assessment of biological resources includes plant and animal distributions, important habitat, endangered or threatened species, and economic considerations. The establishment by Area Committees of priorities for environmental protection, injury assessment, and restoration will promote efficient spill response. Three special issues are discussed: (1) improving our ability to restore natural resources, (2) the potential role of biological diversity in spill response planning, and (3) planning for animal rehabilitation.

Book chapter↗
USGS2010

Effects of Changes in Irrigation Practices and Aquifer Development on Groundwater Discharge to the Jobos Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve near Salinas, Puerto Rico

Since 1990, about 75 acres of black mangroves have died in the Jobos Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve near Salinas, Puerto Rico. Although many factors can contribute to the mortality of mangroves, changes in irrigation practices, rainfall, and water use resulted in as much as 25 feet of drawdown in the potentiometric surface of the aquifer in the vicinity of the reserve between 1986 and 2002. To clarify the issue, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, conducted a study to ascertain how aquifer development and changes in irrigation practices have affected groundwater levels and groundwater flow to the Mar Negro area of the reserve. Changes in groundwater flow to the mangrove swamp and bay from 1986 to 2004 were estimated in this study by developing and calibrating a numerical groundwater flow model. The transient simulations indicate that prior to 1994, high irrigation return flows more than offset the effect of reduced groundwater withdrawals. In this case, the simulated discharge to the coast in the modeled area was 19 million gallons per day. From 1994 through 2004, furrow irrigation was completely replaced by micro-drip irrigation, thus eliminating return flows and the simulated average coastal discharge was 7 million gallons per day, a reduction of 63 percent. The simulated average groundwater discharge to the coastal mangrove swamps in the reserve from 1986 to 1993 was 2 million gallons per day, compared to an average simulated discharge of 0.2 million gallons per day from 1994 to 2004. The average annual rainfall for each of these periods was 38 inches. The groundwater discharge to the coastal mangrove swamps in the Jobos Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve was estimated at about 0.5 million gallons per day for 2003-2004 because of higher than average annual rainfall during these 2 years. The groundwater flow model was used to test five alternatives for increasing groundwater discharge to the coastal mangrove swamps to approximately 1.4 million gallons per day: (1) artificially recharging the aquifer with injection wells or (2) by increasing irrigation return flow by going back to furrow irrigation; (3) termination of groundwater withdrawals near the mangroves; (4) reduction of groundwater withdrawals at irrigation wells by 50 percent; and (5) a combination of alternatives 2 and 4 increasing irrigation return flows and decreasing irrigation withdrawals. Each alternative assumed average climatic conditions and groundwater withdrawals at 2004 rates. Alternative 1 required 1.5 million gallons per day of injected water. Alternative 2 required flooding 958 acres with a rate of 1.84 million gallons per day if no crops are grown. Alternative 3 required the termination of 2.44 million gallons per day of withdrawals to achieve 1.34 million gallons per day of discharge to the mangroves. Alternative 4 did not achieve the objective with only 0.80 million gallons per day simulated discharge to the mangroves, while requiring a 1.26 million gallon per day reduction in groundwater withdrawals. Alternative 5 required flooding fields with additional 1.13 million gallons of day and the same reduction in groundwater withdrawals, but did achieve the objective of about 1.4 million gallons per day discharge to the mangroves. Alternative 1, incorporating injection wells near the reserve required the least amount of water to raise groundwater levels and maintain discharge of 1.4 million gallons per day through the mangroves.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2017

Foundations of translational ecology

Ecologists who specialize in translational ecology (TE) seek to link ecological knowledge to decision making by integrating ecological science with the full complement of social dimensions that underlie today's complex environmental issues. TE is motivated by a search for outcomes that directly serve the needs of natural resource managers and decision makers. This objective distinguishes it from both basic and applied ecological research and, as a practice, it deliberately extends research beyond theory or opportunistic applications. TE is uniquely positioned to address complex issues through interdisciplinary team approaches and integrated scientist–practitioner partnerships. The creativity and context‐specific knowledge of resource managers, practitioners, and decision makers inform and enrich the scientific process and help shape use‐driven, actionable science. Moreover, addressing research questions that arise from on‐the‐ground management issues – as opposed to the top‐down or expert‐oriented perspectives of traditional science – can foster the high levels of trust and commitment that are critical for long‐term, sustained engagement between partners.

Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment↗
USGS2002

Values and attitudes of National Wildlife Refuge managers and biologists; Report to respondents

The issues affecting natural resource management, the society in which natural resource management occurs, natural resource agency personnel, and the publics they serve have changed in recent decades. Previous studies of Refuge professionals in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) have revealed that employees lack strong commitment to the current organizational structure, were frustrated with the lack of communication within the agency and felt there was a need for strong leadership (PEER 1998, 1999). These results prompted the authors to have further questions about refuge management in the Fish and Wildlife Service. What do employees value about their agency? Is there a difference in values between refuge managers and biologists and if so, what are those differences and what influences those differences? Recently, there has been speculation that changes in society and the demographic makeup of natural resource professionals has caused a paradigm shift for natural resource management (Ballard 2002; Brown and Harris 1992abc, 2000; Maestas 2002). But, there has been little work assessing the values, attitudes or behaviors of natural resource professionals to determine if a paradigm shift is really occurring. Most of the work in the field of values, attitudes, and behaviors has focused on the public and their interaction with environmental management issues; such as, endangered species management (Lybecker et al. 2002; Solomon 1998), human-wildlife conflict (Baker and Fritsch 1997; Chase et al. 1999; Jones and Thomas 1999; Mankin et al. 1999), changes in hunting or trapping regulations (Loker et al. 1998; Manfredo et al. 1999; Whittaker and Torres 1998), or management of public lands (Badalamente et al. 2000). The purpose of this study was to gain a better understanding of the values and attitudes refuge employees have toward natural resources. The goal was to survey National Wildlife Refuge professionals about natural resource management. We surveyed Refuge Managers and Refuge Biologists (n=480) at staffed U.S. National Wildlife Refuges in the contiguous 48 states in the fall of 200 1. We used a modified Dillman design, resulting in a 68% response rate. The objectives of this study were to (1) determine and compare the environmental values of refuge managers and biologists at selected refuges and (2) assess attitudes about various institutional factors (public involvement and planning). Analyses of data revealed that these managers and biologists did not differ substantially in terms of their environmental values. Refuge professionals were supportive of public involvement in planning and management, but hoped to maintain management authority throughout the process. Professionals were skeptical concerning the applicability of long term planning, but were generally supportive of the planning process. Attitudes toward the Service were conflicting: professionals felt that the Service needed to provide better leadership and direction, but that the Refuge System needed to assert its autonomy and independence from the rest of the Service.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2007

Investigating the Environmental Effects of Agriculture Practices on Natural Resources: Scientific Contributions of the U.S. Geological Survey to Enhance the Management of Agricultural Landscapes

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) enhances and protects the quality of life in the United States by advancing scientific knowledge to facilitate effective management of hydrologic, biologic, and geologic resources. Results of selected USGS research and monitoring projects in agricultural landscapes are presented in this Fact Sheet. Significant environmental and social issues associated with agricultural production include changes in the hydrologic cycle; introduction of toxic chemicals, nutrients, and pathogens; reduction and alteration of wildlife habitats; and invasive species. Understanding environmental consequences of agricultural production is critical to minimize unintended environmental consequences. The preservation and enhancement of our natural resources can be achieved by measuring the success of improved management practices and by adjusting conservation policies as needed to ensure long-term protection.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2013

U.S. Geological Survey ecosystems science strategy—Advancing discovery and application through collaboration

Executive Summary Ecosystem science is critical to making informed decisions about natural resources that can sustain our Nation’s economic and environmental well-being. Resource managers and policymakers are faced with countless decisions each year at local, regional, and national levels on issues as diverse as renewable and nonrenewable energy development, agriculture, forestry, water supply, and resource allocations at the urban-rural interface. The urgency for sound decisionmaking is increasing dramatically as the world is being transformed at an unprecedented pace and in uncertain directions. Environmental changes are associated with natural hazards, greenhouse gas emissions, and increasing demands for water, land, food, energy, mineral, and living resources. At risk is the Nation’s environmental capital, the goods and services provided by resilient ecosystems that are vital to the health and wellbeing of human societies. Ecosystem science—the study of systems of organisms interacting with their environment and the consequences of natural and human-induced change on these systems—is necessary to inform decisionmakers as they develop policies to adapt to these changes. This Ecosystems Science Strategy is built on a framework that includes basic and applied science. It highlights the critical roles that U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists and partners can play in building scientific understanding and providing timely information to decisionmakers. The strategy underscores the connection between scientific discoveries and the application of new knowledge, and it integrates ecosystem science and decisionmaking, producing new scientific outcomes to assist resource managers and providing public benefits. We envision the USGS as a leader in integrating scientific information into decisionmaking processes that affect the Nation’s natural resources and human well-being. The USGS is uniquely positioned to play a pivotal role in ecosystem science. With its wide range of expertise, the Bureau can bring holistic, cross-scale, interdisciplinary capabilities to the design and conduct of monitoring, research, and modeling and to new technologies for data collection, management, and visualization. Collectively, these capabilities can be used to reveal ecological patterns and processes, explain how and why ecosystems change, and forecast change over different spatial and temporal scales. USGS science can provide managers with options and decision-support tools to use resources sustainably. The USGS has long-standing, collaborative relationships with the Department of the Interior (DOI) and other partners in the natural sciences, in both conducting science and applying the results. The USGS engages these partners in cooperative investigations that otherwise would lack the necessary support or be too expensive for a single bureau to conduct. The heart of this strategy is a framework for USGS ecosystems science that focuses on five long-term goals, which are seen as interconnected components that reinforce our vision of the USGS providing science that is at the forefront of decisionmaking: Improve understanding of ecosystem structure, function, and processes. The focus for this goal is an understanding of how ecosystems work, including the dynamics of species, their populations, interactions, and genetics, and how they change across spatial and temporal scales. Advance understanding of how drivers influence ecosystem change. The challenges here are explaining the drivers of ecosystem change, their spatio-temporal patterns, their uncertainties and interactions, and their influence on ecosystem processes and dynamics. Improve understanding of the services that ecosystems provide to society. Here the emphasis is on the measurement of environmental capital and ecosystem services, and the identification of sources and patterns of change in space and time. Develop tools, technologies, and capacities to inform decisionmaking about ecosystems. This includes developing new technologies and approaches for conducting applications-oriented ecosystem science. A principal challenge will be how to quantify uncertainty and incorporate it in decision analysis. Apply science to enhance strategies for management, conservation, and restoration of ecosystems. These challenges include development of novel approaches to monitoring, assessment, and restoration of ecosystems; new methods to address species of concern and communities at risk; and innovations in decision analysis and support to address imminent ecosystem changes or those that are underway. Closely integrated with the five goals are four strategic approaches that provide the path forward for the USGS Ecosystems Mission Area. These approaches cross-cut all of the goals and are seen as essential to the implementation of this strategy: Assess information needs for ecosystem science through enhanced partnerships. Work with the DOI and other agencies and institutions to identify, design, and implement priority decision-driven ecological research. Promote the use of interdisciplinary ecosystem science. Design and conduct interdisciplinary process-oriented research in ecosystem science. Enhance modeling and forecasting. Build models to forecast ecosystem change, assess future management scenarios, and reduce uncertainties through an adaptive learning process. Support decisionmaking. Use quantitative approaches to assess the vulnerabilities of ecosystems, habitats, and species, and evaluate strategies for adaptation, restoration, and sustainable management. Following the four strategic approaches are a set of proposed actions that represent a sampling of specific USGS activities that align with this strategy and that address the Nation’s most pressing environmental needs. The strategy emphasizes coordination of activities across the USGS mission areas pursuant to these goals. Ecosystem science is inherently interdisciplinary and requires a broad perspective that incorporates the biological and physical sciences, climate science, information technology, and scientific capacity in mission areas across the Bureau. With its emphasis on coordination, this strategy can provide a critical underpinning for integrated science efforts with scientists from multiple mission areas of the USGS working together. Of course, the USGS will continue to conduct discipline-specific and interdisciplinary investigations, and both will continue to be vital parts of the ecosystem science portfolio. Finally, the strategy stresses the importance of coordination with other Federal agencies and organizations in the natural resources community. The USGS collaborates with resource agencies in the DOI and other organizations throughout the world to meet societal needs for species and ecosystem management. Working with these agencies and organizations, the USGS will play a key role in guiding sound decisionmaking during the next decade by advancing the scientific foundation for sustaining the natural resources that diverse, productive, resilient ecosystems provide.

Circular↗
USGS2007

Tintina Gold Province Study, Alaska and Yukon Territory, 2002-2007

The Tintina gold province is an arc-shaped 2,000-kilometer-long metallogenic province that extends from northern British Columbia, through the Yukon Territory, and across and into southwestern Alaska. In the United States, the province remains a prime area for gold exploration and includes such large gold deposits as Pogo, Fort Knox-True North, and Donlin Creek. In recent years, gold exploration and development and mining activity have accelerated in the area. Plans have been discussed for public and private projects and infrastructures associated with development. A U.S. Geological Survey study undertaken from 2002 to 2007 provides a context for understanding why and how the mineral resources of the area were formed, why this area is so abundantly endowed, and how the environmental signatures that are characteristic of the area are related to the development of mineral resources. Characterization of natural baseline metal concentrations in the area's watersheds is necessary to address future land-use issues related to mining and/or infrastructure activities. A thorough understanding of water-rock and element-bioavailability processes will help predict the possible environmental impact of development. The five tasks of this study add to the science of defining and understanding an 'intrusion-related gold system.'

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2012

The U.S. Geological Survey Ecosystem Science Strategy, 2012-2022 - Advancing discovery and application through collaboration

Ecosystem science is critical to making informed decisions about natural resources that can sustain our Nation’s economic and environmental well-being. Resource managers and policy-makers are faced with countless decisions each year at local, state, tribal, territorial, and national levels on issues as diverse as renewable and non-renewable energy development, agriculture, forestry, water supply, and resource allocations at the urban-rural interface. The urgency for sound decision-making is increasing dramatically as the world is being transformed at an unprecedented pace and in uncertain directions. Environmental changes are associated with natural hazards, greenhouse gas emissions, and increasing demands for water, land, food, energy, mineral, and living resources. At risk is the Nation’s environmental capital, the goods and services provided by resilient ecosystems that are vital to the health and well-being of human societies. Ecosystem science—the study of systems of organisms interacting with their environment and the consequences of natural and human-induced change on these systems—is necessary to inform decision-makers as they develop policies to adapt to these changes. This Ecosystems Science Strategy is built on a framework that includes basic and applied science. It highlights the critical roles that USGS scientists and partners can play in building scientific understanding and providing timely information to decision-makers. The strategy underscores the connection between scientific discoveries and the application of new knowledge. The strategy integrates ecosystem science and decision-making, producing new scientific outcomes to assist resource managers and providing public benefits. The USGS is uniquely positioned to play an important role in ecosystem science. With its wide range of expertise, the agency can bring holistic, cross-scale, interdisciplinary capabilities to the design and conduct of monitoring, research, and modeling and to new technologies for data collection, management, and visualization. Collectively, these capabilities can be used to reveal ecological patterns and processes, explain how and why ecosystems change, and forecast change over different spatial and temporal scales. USGS science can provide managers with options and decision-support tools to use resources sustainably. The USGS has long-standing, collaborative relationships with the DOI and other partners in the natural sciences, in both conducting science and its application. The USGS engages these partners in cooperative investigations that otherwise would lack the necessary support or be too expensive for a single bureau to conduct. The heart of this strategy is a framework and vision for USGS ecosystems science that focuses on five long-term goals, which are seen as interconnected and reinforcing components: • Improve understanding of ecosystem structure, function, and processes. The focus for this goal is an understanding of how ecosystems work, including the dynamics of species, their populations, interactions, and genetics, and how they change across spatial and temporal scales. • Advance understanding of how drivers influence ecosystem change. The challenges here are explaining the drivers of ecosystem change, their spatio-temporal patterns, their uncertainties and interactions, and their influence on ecosystem processes and dynamics. • Improve understanding of the services that ecosystems provide to society. Here the emphasis is on the measurement of environmental capital and ecosystem services, and the identification of sources and patterns of change in space and time. • Develop tools, technologies, and capacities to inform decision-making about ecosystems. This includes developing new technologies and approaches for conducting applications-oriented ecosystem science. A principal challenge will be how to quantify uncertainty and incorporate it in decision analysis. • Apply science to enhance strategies for management, conservation, and restoration of ecosystems. These challenges include development of novel approaches to monitoring, assessment, and restoration of ecosystems; new methods to address species of concern and communities at risk; and innovations in decision analysis and support to address imminent ecosystem changes or those that are underway. Closely integrated with the five goals are four strategic approaches that provide the path forward for the USGS Ecosystems Mission Area. These approaches cross-cut all of the goals and are seen as essential to the implementation of this strategy: • Assess information needs for ecosystem science through enhanced partnerships. Work with the DOI and other agencies and institutions to identify, design, and implement priority decision-driven ecological research. • Promote the use of interdisciplinary ecosystem science. Design and conduct interdisciplinary process-oriented research in ecosystem science. • Enhance modeling and forecasting. Build models to forecast ecosystem change, assess future management scenarios, and reduce uncertainties through an adaptive learning process. • Support decision-making. Use quantitative approaches to assess the vulnerabilities of ecosystems, habitats, and species, and evaluate strategies for adaptation, restoration, and sustainable management. Following the strategic approaches are a set of proposed actions that represent a sampling of specific activities that align with this strategy and that address the Nation’s most pressing environmental needs. The strategy emphasizes coordination of activities across the USGS mission areas pursuant to these goals. Ecosystem science is inherently interdisciplinary and requires a broad perspective that incorporates the biological and physical sciences, climate science, information technology, and scientific capacity in mission areas across the Bureau. With its emphasis on coordination, this strategy can provide a critical underpinning for integrated science efforts with scientists from multiple mission areas of the USGS working together. Of course, the USGS will continue to conduct both discipline-specific and interdisciplinary investigations, and both will continue to be vital parts of the ecosystem science portfolio. Finally, the strategy stresses the importance of coordination with other Federal agencies and organizations in the natural resources community. The USGS collaborates with resource agencies in the DOI and other organizations throughout the world to meet societal needs for species and ecosystem management. Working with these agencies and organizations, the USGS will play a key role over the next decade in advancing the scientific foundation for sustaining the natural resources that diverse, productive, resilient ecosystems provide.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1982

Results of a modeling workshop concerning economic and environmental trends and concomitant resource management issues in the Mobile Bay area

During the past decade, the southern regions of the U.S. have experienced rapid change which is expected to continue into the foreseeable future. Growth in population, industry, and resource development has been attributed to a variety of advantages such as an abundant and inexpensive labor force, a mild climate, and the availability of energy, water, land, and other natural resources. While this growth has many benefits for the region, it also creates the potential for increased air, water, and solid waste pollution, and modification of natural habitats. A workshop was convened to consider the Mobile Bay area as a site-specific case of growth and its environmental consequences in the southern region. The objectives of the modeling workshop were to: (1) identify major factors of economic development as they relate to growth in the area over the immediate and longer term; (2) identify major environmental and resource management issues associated with this expected growth; and (3) identify and characterize the complex interrelationships among economic and environmental factors. This report summarizes the activities and results of a modeling workshop concerning economic growth and concomitant resource management issues in the Mobile Bay area. The workshop was organized around construction of a simulation model representing the relationships between a series of actions and indicators identified by participants. The workshop model had five major components. An Industry Submodel generated scenarios of growth in several industrial and transportation sectors. A Human Population/Economy Submodel calculated human population and economic variables in response to employment opportunities. A Land Use/Air Quality Submodel tabulated changes in land use, shoreline use, and air quality. A Water Submodel calculated indicators of water quality and quantity for fresh surface water, ground water, and Mobile Bay based on discharge information provided by the Industry and Human Population/Economy Submodels. Finally, a Fish Submodel calculated indicators of habitat quality for finfish and shellfish, utilizing information on water quality and wetlands acreage. The workshop was successful in identifying many of the critical interrelations between components of the Mobile area system. Not all of those interactions, such as the feedback of air quality as a limitation on development, could be incorporated into the workshop model because of the model's broad spatial scale and because of uncertainties or data gaps. Thus, the value of the modeling workshop was in the areas outlines below, rather than in the predictive power of the initial model developed at the workshop. First, participants developed a holistic perspective on the interactions which will determine future economic and environmental trends within the Mobile Bay area. Potential environmental consequences and limitations to grown identified at the workshop included: shoreline and water access; water quality of Mobile Bay; finfish and shellfish habitat quality with respect to dissolved oxygen and coliforms; air quality; and acreage of critical wetland habitat. Second, the model's requirements for specific, quantitative information stimulated supporting analyses, such as economic input-output calculations, which provide additional insight into the Mobile Bay area system. Third, the perspective of the Mobile area as an interacting system was developed in an open, cooperative forum which my provide a foundation for conflict resolution based on common understanding. Finally, the identification of model limitations and uncertainties should be useful in guiding the efficient allocation of future research effort.

Alabama↗
USGS1998

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

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

Environmental Health Perspectives↗
USGS2007

Remotely Sensed Data Collections: Offerings from EROS

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Center for Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) maintains a wide variety of remotely sensed data collections that contain a wealth of information about the Earth’s land surfaces. Acquired by special sensors carried aboard civilian satellites and aircraft, the images and other data in these collections provide a unique perspective of the terrestrial environment. They represent invaluable resources for scientists, resource managers, policy makers, and educators to use in studying such things as natural hazards, conservation issues, land use and economic development, and environmental change at local, regional, and global levels. Different types of sensors record different types of information, resulting in diverse data products, each with its own particular strengths. Highlighted here are eight remotely sensed data collections that are currently available from EROS.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2011

Geology for a changing world 2010-2020-Implementing the U.S. Geological Survey science strategy

This report describes a science strategy for the geologic activities of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the years 2010-2020. It presents six goals with accompanying strategic actions and products that implement the science directions of USGS Circular 1309, 'Facing Tomorrow's Challenges-U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007-2017.' These six goals focus on providing the geologic underpinning needed to wisely use our natural resources, understand and mitigate hazards and environmental change, and understand the relationship between humans and the environment. The goals emphasize the critical role of the USGS in providing long-term research, monitoring, and assessments for the Nation and the world. Further, they describe measures that must be undertaken to ensure geologic expertise and knowledge for the future. The natural science issues facing today's world are complex and cut across many scientific disciplines. The Earth is a system in which atmosphere, oceans, land, and life are all connected. Rocks and soils contain the answers to important questions about the origin of energy and mineral resources, the evolution of life, climate change, natural hazards, ecosystem structures and functions, and the movements of nutrients and toxicants. The science of geology has the power to help us understand the processes that link the physical and biological world so that we can model and forecast changes in the system. Ensuring the success of this strategy will require integration of geological knowledge with the other natural sciences and extensive collaboration across USGS science centers and with partners in Federal, State, and local agencies, academia, industry, nongovernmental organizations and, most importantly, the American public. The first four goals of this report describe the scientific issues facing society in the next 10 years and the actions and products needed to respond to these issues. The final two goals focus on the expertise and infrastructure needed to ensure the long-term sustainability of the geological sciences in the USGS. The ultimate goal of USGS science and of the strategy laid out in this document is to contribute to the development of a sustainable society that operates in harmony with the Earth systems that society depends upon. As we begin the second decade of the 21st century, our Nation faces growing challenges in resource availability, climate and environmental change, and natural hazards. Meeting these challenges will require strong collaboration across the natural and social sciences and extensive partnerships with both the public and private sectors. The six goals described in this document represent a mix of scientific focus areas and operational necessities that together provide a comprehensive roadmap for USGS geologic science to effectively contribute to the USGS mission, providing science for a changing world.

Circular↗
USGS1999

Environmental geology: Our professional public responsibility

Conflicts between different interest groups for use of natural resources is one area where state geological surveys can provide assistance. A state geological survey working within the scientific constraints of specific issues can remain objective in its presentations and maintain the faith of both the conflicting interest groups and the public. One cannot vary from the objective view or you will quickly be criticized. Criticism can still occur from one side of a natural resource issue as your data might counter their views. However, the final decisions are almost always made in some legislators, or regulators, area of responsibility. The responsibility of the state geological survey is to provide the important data that will assist in making correct decisions. Should one party in the conflict become extreme in their demands, a potential compromise that is beneficial to both sides can be lost. In Kansas, the classical natural resource problem of resource/recreation in a populated area is presented as a case study. The state geological survey presented data on sand resources in the Kansas River and its valley in northeast Kansas. That information was important to both recreation and dredging interests where the political problem is a conflict of sand use as a construction material resource versus use of the alluvial river as an important recreation area, especially for canoeing. However, when a reasonable compromise was near completion in the Kansas Legislature one side, in a bold move to develop an advantage, ruined that potential for compromise.Conflicts between different interest groups for use of natural resources is one area where state geological surveys can provide assistance. A state geological survey working within the scientific constraints of specific issues can remain objective in its presentations and maintain the faith of both the conflicting interest groups and the public. In Kansas, the classical natural resource problem of resource/recreation in a populated area is presented as a case study. The state geological survey presented data on sand resources in the Kansas River and its valley in northeast Kansas. That information was important to both recreation and dredging interests.

Environmental Geology↗
USGS2016

Natural graphite demand and supply - Implications for electric vehicle battery requirements

Electric vehicles have been promoted to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and lessen U.S. dependence on petroleum for transportation. Growth in U.S. sales of electric vehicles has been hindered by technical difficulties and the high cost of the lithium-ion batteries used to power many electric vehicles (more than 50% of the vehicle cost). Groundbreaking has begun for a lithium-ion battery factory in Nevada that, at capacity, could manufacture enough batteries to power 500,000 electric vehicles of various types and provide economies of scale to reduce the cost of batteries. Currently, primary synthetic graphite derived from petroleum coke is used in the anode of most lithium-ion batteries. An alternate may be the use of natural flake graphite, which would result in estimated graphite cost reductions of more than US$400 per vehicle at 2013 prices. Most natural flake graphite is sourced from China, the world's leading graphite producer. Sourcing natural flake graphite from deposits in North America could reduce raw material transportation costs and, given China's growing internal demand for flake graphite for its industries and ongoing environmental, labor, and mining issues, may ensure a more reliable and environmentally conscious supply of graphite. North America has flake graphite resources, and Canada is currently a producer, but most new mining projects in the United States require more than 10 yr to reach production, and demand could exceed supplies of flake graphite. Natural flake graphite may serve only to supplement synthetic graphite, at least for the short-term outlook.

GSA Special Papers↗
USGS2013

Challenge theme 5: Current and future needs of energy and mineral resources in the Borderlands and the effects of their development: Chapter 7 in United States-Mexican Borderlands: Facing tomorrow's challenges through USGS science

Exploration and extraction activities related to energy and mineral resources in the Borderlands—such as coal-fired power plants, offshore drilling, and mining—can create issues that have potentially major economic and environmental implications. Resource assessments and development projects, environmental studies, and other related evaluations help to understand some of these issues, such as power plant emissions and the erosion/denudation of abandoned mine lands. Information from predictive modeling, monitoring, and environmental assessments are necessary to understand the full effects of energy and mineral exploration, development, and utilization. The exploitation of these resources can negatively affect human health and the environment, its natural resources, and its ecological services (air, water, soil, recreation, wildlife, etc.). This chapter describes the major energy and mineral issues of the Borderlands and how geologic frameworks, integrated interdisciplinary (geobiologic) investigations, and other related studies can address the anticipated increases in demands on natural resources in the region.

United States-Mexico Borderlands↗
USGS1996

U. S. Geological Survey programs in Pennsylvania

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is involved in mapping and studying land, mineral, biological, and water resources and determining the risk from earthquakes and other natural hazards, which are of importance to the citizens of Pennsylvania. This Fact Sheet describes how the USGS is addressing some of the major environmental issues in Pennsylvania, which include availability of mineral resources; contamination of the environment by hazardous wastes; effects of coal mining, oil and gas production, and agriculture on the environment; nutrient input to streams and estuaries; and adequacy of good-quality water supplies. Information on acquiring the thousands of map, book, and aerial photographic products of the USGS also is given.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS1994

U.S. Geological Survey yearbook, fiscal year 1993: At work across the Nation

The need for earth science has never been more paramount. The devastating flooding of the Mississippi River this past year, strikingly portrayed on the cover and discussed in detail in this report (p. 37-42), was a sobering reminder of nature's elemental power. As a Nation, we face many environmental and economic challenges, such as natural hazards, that can be addressed effectively only through science. Water quality, resource assessments, climate change, and toxic wastes are all critical issues that can best be dealt with when approached from a sound scientific base. The goal of the U.S. Geological Survey is to provide hydrologic, geologic, and topographic information and understanding that contribute to the wise management of the Nation's natural resources and that promote the health, safety, and well-being of all Americans. FY1993 has proven to be a particularly challenging one for the USGS. We entered into a time of transition from the long-term leadership of Director Dallas Peck and Associate Director Doyle Frederick to the appointment of a new director. We thank Dallas and Doyle for their many years of service and for their support during the transition.

Yearbook↗
USGS2024

Composite estimation to combine spatially overlapping environmental monitoring surveys

Long-term environmental monitoring surveys are designed to achieve a desired precision (measured by variance) of resource conditions based on natural variability information. Over time, increases in resource variability and in data use to address issues focused on small areas with limited sample sizes require bolstering of attainable precision. It is often prohibitive to do this by increasing sampling effort. In cases with spatially overlapping monitoring surveys, composite estimation offers a statistical way to obtain a precision-weighted combination of survey estimates to provide improved population estimates (more accurate) with improved precisions (lower variances). We present a composite estimator for overlapping surveys, a summary of compositing procedures, and a case study to illustrate the procedures and benefits of composite estimation. The study uses the two terrestrial monitoring surveys administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) that entirely overlap. Using 2015–18 data and 13 land-health indicators, we obtained and compared survey and composite indicator estimates of percent area meeting land-health standards for sagebrush communities in Wyoming’s Greater Sage-Grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ) Core and NonCore conservation areas on BLM-managed lands. We statistically assessed differences in indicator estimates between the conservation areas using composite estimates and estimates of the two surveys individually. We found composite variance to be about six to 24 units lower than 37% of the survey variances and composite estimates to differ by about six to 10 percentage points from six survey estimates. The composite improvements resulted in finding 11 indicators to statistically differ ( p <0.05) between the conservation areas compared to only six and seven indicators for the individual surveys. Overall, we found composite estimation to be an efficient and useful option for improving environmental monitoring information where two surveys entirely overlap and suggest how this estimation method could be beneficial where environmental surveys partially overlap and in small area applications.

Wyoming↗