USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Oregon Geology”

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 487 records · Page 27Linked to original sources
USGS2014

Evaluation of alternative groundwater-management strategies for the Bureau of Reclamation Klamath Project, Oregon and California

The water resources of the upper Klamath Basin, in southern Oregon and northern California, are managed to achieve various complex and interconnected purposes. Since 2001, irrigators in the Bureau of Reclamation Klamath Irrigation Project (Project) have been required to limit surface-water diversions to protect habitat for endangered freshwater and anadromous fishes. The reductions in irrigation diversions have led to an increased demand for groundwater by Project irrigators, particularly in drought years. The potential effects of sustained pumping on groundwater and surface-water resources have caused concern among Federal and state agencies, Indian tribes, wildlife groups, and groundwater users. To aid in the development of a viable groundwater-management strategy for the Project, the U.S. Geological Survey, in collaboration with the Klamath Water and Power Agency and the Oregon Water Resources Department, developed a groundwater-management model that links groundwater simulation with techniques of constrained optimization. The overall goal of the groundwater-management model is to determine the patterns of groundwater pumping that, to the extent possible, meet the supplemental groundwater demands of the Project. To ensure that groundwater development does not adversely affect groundwater and surface-water resources, the groundwater-management model includes constraints to (1) limit the effects of groundwater withdrawal on groundwater discharge to streams and lakes that support critical habitat for fish listed under the Endangered Species Act, (2) ensure that drawdowns do not exceed limits allowed by Oregon water law, and (3) ensure that groundwater withdrawal does not adversely affect agricultural drain flows that supply a substantial portion of water for irrigators and wildlife refuges in downslope areas of the Project. Groundwater-management alternatives were tested and designed within the framework of the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (currently [2013] awaiting authorizing Federal legislation), which would establish a permanent limit on the amount of surface water that can be diverted annually to the Project. Groundwater-management scenarios were evaluated for the period 1970•2004; supplemental groundwater demand by the Project was estimated as the part of irrigation demand that would not have been satisfied by the surface-water diversion allowed under the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement. Over the 35-year management period, 22 years have supplemental groundwater demand, which ranges from a few thousand acre-feet (acre-ft) to about 100,000 acre-ft in the driest years. The results of the groundwater-management model indicate that supplemental groundwater pumping by the Project can be managed to avoid adverse effects to groundwater discharge that supports critical aquatic habitat. The existing configuration of wells in the Project would be able to meet groundwater-pumping goals in 14 of the 22 years with supplemental groundwater demand; however, substantial irrigation shortages can be expected during drought periods when the demand for supplemental groundwater is highest. The maximum irrigation-season withdrawal calculated by the groundwater-management model is about 60,000 acre-ft, the average withdrawal in drought years is about 54,000 acre-ft, and the amount of unmet groundwater demand reaches a maximum of about 45,000 acre-ft. A comparison of optimized groundwater withdrawals by geographic region shows that the highest annual withdrawals are associated with wells in the Tule Lake and Klamath Valley regions of the Project. The patterns of groundwater withdrawal also show that a substantial amount of the available pumping capacity is unused due to the restrictions imposed by drawdown constraints. Subsequent model applications were used to evaluate the sensitivity of optimization results to various factors. A sensitivity analysis quantified the changes in optimized groundwater withdrawals that result from changes in drawdown-constraint limits. The analysis showed the potential for substantial increases in withdrawals of groundwater with less restrictive drawdown limits at drawdown-control sites in the California part of the model. Systematic variation of the drains-constraint limit yielded a trade-off curve between optimized groundwater withdrawals and the allowable reduction in groundwater discharge to the Project drain system. Additional model applications were used to assess the value of increasing the pumping capacity of the network of wells serving the Project, and the relation between reduced off-Project groundwater pumping and increased pumping by Project irrigators.

California;Oregon↗
USGS2006

Geologic map of the Yacolt quadrangle, Clark County, Washington

The Yacolt 7.5' quadrangle is situated in the foothills of the western Cascade Range of southwestern Washington approximately 35 km northeast of Portland, Oregon. Since late Eocene time, the Cascade Range has been the locus of an active volcanic arc associated with underthrusting of oceanic lithosphere beneath the North American continent along the Cascadia Subduction Zone. Volcanic and shallow-level intrusive rocks emplaced early in the history of the arc underlie most of the Yacolt quadrangle, forming a dissected and partly glaciated terrain with elevations between 250 and 2180 ft (75 and 665 m). The bedrock surface slopes irregularly but steeply to the southwest, forming the eastern margin of the Portland Basin, and weakly consolidated Miocene and younger basin-fill sediments lap up against the bedrock terrain in the southern part of the map area. A deep canyon, carved by the East Fork Lewis River that flows westward out of the Cascade Range, separates Yacolt and Bells Mountains, the two highest points in the quadrangle. Just west of the quadrangle, the river departs from its narrow bedrock channel and enters a wide alluvial floodplain. Bedrock of the Yacolt quadrangle consists of near-horizontal strata of Oligocene volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks that comprise early products of the Cascade volcanic arc. Basalt and basaltic andesite flows predominate. Most were emplaced on the flanks of a large mafic shield volcano and are interfingered with crudely bedded sections of volcanic breccia of probable lahar origin and a variety of well bedded epiclastic sedimentary rocks. At Yacolt Mountain, the volcanogenic rocks are intruded by a body of Miocene quartz diorite that is compositionally distinct from any volcanic rocks in the map area. The town of Yacolt sits in a north-northwest-trending valley apparently formed within a major fault zone. Several times during the Pleistocene, mountain glaciers moved down the Lewis River valley and spread southward into the map area. The largest glacier(s) covered the entire map area north of the East Fork Lewis River except for the summit of Yacolt Mountain. As the ice receded, it left behind a sculpted bedrock topography thickly mantled by drift, and deposited outwash in the fault-bounded valley at Yacolt and along the East Fork Lewis River valley. This map is a contribution to a program designed to improve geologic knowledge of the Portland Basin region of the Pacific Northwest urban corridor, the densely populated Cascadia forearc region of western Washington and Oregon. More detailed information on the bedrock and surficial geology of the basin and its surrounding area is necessary to refine assessments of seismic risk, ground-failure hazards and resource availability in this rapidly growing region.

Scientific Investigations Map↗
USGS2026

Groundwater tracing used to delineate recharge areas and map karst groundwater pathways for subterranean streams at Oregon Caves National Monument and Preserve

Oregon Caves National Monument and Preserve in southwestern Oregon is a 4,554-​acre area managed by the National Park Service that is home to several cave systems, including Oregon Caves, which is the longest cave in Oregon, with 3.03 miles of mapped passages. Because of the interconnected nature of karst hydrologic systems, it is critical to understand the areas that can influence water quality and quantity in karst environments. Toward this goal, dye tracing was conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey from 2021 to 2024 to better understand the pathways that karst groundwater follows at Oregon Caves National Monument and Preserve and to delineate recharge areas for two caves, Oregon Caves and Cave Next Door. During the project, eight dye injections were conducted, delineating a 0.51-​square-​mile recharge area for Oregon Caves and a 0.69-​square-​mile recharge area for Cave Next Door. Additionally, the study helped to identify three resurgences associated with Oregon Caves that were previously unknown and showed that the recharge areas for the two caves were distinct from one another. The dye traces also illuminated some unique recharge characteristics of the karst at Oregon Caves, including a high variance in karst groundwater velocities, retention within the karst aquifers, and a significant diffuse-​flow component.

Oregon↗
USGS2008

Multibeam Sonar Mapping and Modeling of a Submerged Bryophyte Mat in Crater Lake, Oregon

Traditionally, multibeam data have been used to map sea floor or lake floor morphology as well as the distribution of surficial facies in order to characterize the geologic component of benthic habitats. In addition to using multibeam data for geologic studies, we want to determine if these data can also be used directly to map the distribution of biota. Multibeam bathymetry and acoustic backscatter data collected in Crater Lake, Oregon, in 2000 are used to map the distribution of a deep-water bryophyte mat, which will be extremely useful for understanding the overall ecology of the lake. To map the bryophyte's distribution, depth range, acoustic backscatter intensity, and derived bathymetric index grids are used as inputs into a hierarchical decision-tree classification model. Observations of the bryophyte mat from over 23 line kilometers of lake-floor video collected in the summer of 2006 are used as controls for the model. The resulting map matches well with ground-truth information and shows that the bryophyte mat covers most of the platform surrounding Wizard Island as well as on outcrops around the caldera wall.

Data Series↗
USGS1996

Ground-water data for the Warm Springs Indian Reservation and contiguous areas, north-central Oregon

This report presents well data that were collected and compiled during 1985-86 by the U.S. Geological Survey and used to determine the amount of ground water discharging to the Deschutes River on and near the Warm Springs Indian Reservation. The report contains well-construction data from 171 wells, information from drillers' logs for 66 wells, water-level data for 29 wells, and a map showing well locations.

Oregon↗
USGS2005

The seismic project of the National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program

In 1997, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the five western States of Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington joined in a partnership called the National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program (NTHMP) to enhance the quality and quantity of seismic data provided to the NOAA tsunami warning centers in Alaska and Hawaii. The NTHMP funded a seismic project that now provides the warning centers with real-time seismic data over dedicated communication links and the Internet from regional seismic networks monitoring earthquakes in the five western states, the U.S. National Seismic Network in Colorado, and from domestic and global seismic stations operated by other agencies. The goal of the project is to reduce the time needed to issue a tsunami warning by providing the warning centers with high-dynamic range, broadband waveforms in near real time. An additional goal is to reduce the likelihood of issuing false tsunami warnings by rapidly providing to the warning centers parametric information on earthquakes that could indicate their tsunamigenic potential, such as hypocenters, magnitudes, moment tensors, and shake distribution maps. New or upgraded field instrumentation was installed over a 5-year period at 53 seismic stations in the five western states. Data from these instruments has been integrated into the seismic network utilizing Earthworm software. This network has significantly reduced the time needed to respond to teleseismic and regional earthquakes. Notably, the West Coast/Alaska Tsunami Warning Center responded to the 28 February 2001 Mw 6.8 Nisqually earthquake beneath Olympia, Washington within 2 minutes compared to an average response time of over 10 minutes for the previous 18 years. ?? Springer 2005.

Natural Hazards↗
USGS2022

Great expectations for earthquake early warnings on the United States West Coast

In October 2019, California became the first state in the United States to fully activate a public earthquake early warning system—ShakeAlert®—managed by the U.S. Geological Survey. The system was subsequently rolled out in March 2021 in Oregon and May 2021 in Washington. Earthquake early warning (EEW) systems can provide seconds of notice to people and technological systems that shaking is imminent, but their effectiveness depends on recipients’ expectations and actions as well as technical performance. To better understand these dependencies, we surveyed representative samples of adults in California (N = 1219), Oregon (N = 1020), and Washington (N = 1037) in February 2021. Most respondents had experienced earthquakes, but few had lived through violent shaking; most had not followed protective action guidance to Drop, Cover, and Hold On (DCHO) in earthquakes; and most reported no personal or social harm from prior earthquakes. Nevertheless, expectations and perceived usefulness of EEW were high, and higher still for those who expected alerts to be accurate and easy to use, expressed tolerance of missed and erroneous warnings, and expected to be affected by a damaging earthquake in their lifetime. Results suggest opportunities to better align public preferences and expectations with ShakeAlert operations. For example, some respondents preferred lower alerting thresholds than those proposed by government and scientists. Moreover, reported tolerance of warning errors was widespread, but respondents wanted explanations quickly, suggesting a need to further develop post-alert messaging. Findings from this study should be informative for future research on the co-evolution of experiences and expectations with EEW systems.

California, Oregon, Washington↗
USGS2020

Landslide disparities, flume discoveries, and Oso despair

Landslide dynamics is the branch of science that seeks to understand the motion of landslides by applying Newton's laws. This memoir focusses on a 40‐year effort to understand motion of highly mobile—and highly lethal—landslides such as debris avalanches and debris flows. A major component of this work entailed development and operation of the U.S. Geological Survey debris flow flume, a unique, large‐scale experimental facility in Oregon. Experiments there yielded new insights that informed development of mathematical models that were aimed not only at explaining landslide dynamics but also at evaluating landslide and debris flow hazards. The most sophisticated of these models, called D‐Claw, found its first practical application during investigations of the 2014 Oso, Washington, landslide disaster. That event provided indelible lessons about the utility and sociology of science in the real world.

Washington↗
USGS1986

Klamath-Blue Mountain lineament, Oregon

Regional gravity data clearly show a zone of southwest-northeast lineations across Oregon that defines a major crustal lineament. Its existence is supported by geologic and geophysical data. Its correlation with the northwestern boundaries of the Klamath and Blue Mountain provinces suggests that these are continuous beneath the Cascade volcanic arc. The lineament may represent a pre-Tertiary strike-slip continental margin which, from paleomagnetic evidence, later rotated clockwise into its present position.

Oregon↗
USGS1924

Riddle folio, Oregon

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Folios of the Geologic Atlas↗
USGS2014

Ecoregions of Arizona (poster)

Ecoregions denote areas of general similarity in ecosystems and in the type, quality, and quantity of environmental resources; they are designed to serve as a spatial framework for the research, assessment, management, and monitoring of ecosystems and ecosystem components. By recognizing the spatial differences in the capacities and potentials of ecosystems, ecoregions stratify the environment by its probable response to disturbance. These general purpose regions are critical for structuring and implementing ecosystem management strategies across federal agencies, state agencies, and nongovernment organizations that are responsible for different types of resources within the same geographical areas. The Arizona ecoregion map was compiled at a scale of 1:250,000. It revises and subdivides an earlier national ecoregion map that was originally compiled at a smaller scale. The approach used to compile this map is based on the premise that ecological regions can be identified through the analysis of the spatial patterns and the composition of biotic and abiotic phenomena that affect or reflect differences in ecosystem quality and integrity. These phenomena include geology, physiography, vegetation, climate, soils, land use, wildlife, and hydrology. The relative importance of each characteristic varies from one ecological region to another regardless of the hierarchical level. A Roman numeral hierarchical scheme has been adopted for different levels of ecological regions. Level I is the coarsest level, dividing North America into 15 ecological regions. Level II divides the continent into 50 regions. At level III, the continental United States contains 105 ecoregions and the conterminous United States has 85 ecoregions. Level IV is a further subdivision of level III ecoregions. Arizona contains arid deserts and canyonlands, semiarid shrub- and grass-covered plains, woodland- and shrubland-covered hills, lava fields and volcanic plateaus, forested mountains, glaciated peaks, and river alluvial floodplains. Ecological diversity is remarkably high. There are 7 level III ecoregions and 52 level IV ecoregions in Arizona and many continue into ecologically similar parts of adjacent states. This poster is part of a collaborative project primarily between the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), USEPA National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory (Corvallis, Oregon), USEPA Region IX, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)–Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), The Nature Conservancy, and several Arizona state agencies. The project is associated with an interagency effort to develop a common national framework of ecological regions. Reaching that objective requires recognition of the differences in the conceptual approaches and mapping methodologies applied to develop the most common ecoregion-type frameworks, including those developed by the USDA–Forest Service, the USEPA, and the NRCS. As each of these frameworks is further refined, their differences are becoming less discernible. Collaborative ecoregion projects, such as this one in Arizona, are a step toward attaining consensus and consistency in ecoregion frameworks for the entire nation.

Arizona↗