SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Water Policy”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 523 records · Page 29Linked to original sources

USGS2024

The economics of decarbonizing Costa Rica's agriculture, forestry and other land uses sectors

In 2018, Costa Rica demonstrated its commitment to the Paris Agreement and published its Decarbonization Plan for achieving zero net emissions by the year 2050. We evaluate the impacts of the country's strategy for decarbonizing its Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Uses (AFOLU) sectors by coupling the Integrated Economic-Environmental Modeling framework with high-resolution spatial land use-land cover change and ecosystem services modeling (IEEM+ESM). Our results show that decarbonization of AFOLU would simultaneously enhance carbon storage, water purification, water regulation and erosion mitigation ecosystem services. Moreover, the positive cumulative wealth impact of decarbonization would be approximately US$7.27 billion by 2050 while lifting an additional 3810 individuals out of poverty. From a public investment perspective, decarbonization would have a fiscally neutral impact with the economic benefits sufficient in magnitude to off-set policy implementation costs and generate economic returns of over US$852 million when changes in natural capital stocks and environmental quality are considered. This application to Costa Rica is the first integrated economy-wide analysis of a growing number of decarbonization plans globally. The IEEM+ESM approach provides an integrated framework for analyzing decarbonization plans and can be used to refine AFOLU mitigation strategies to capitalize on synergies and minimize negative trade-offs across the three dimensions of wealth and sustainable economic development, namely economy, society and the environment.

Ecological Economics↗

USGS2013

Defining a data management strategy for USGS Chesapeake Bay studies

The mission of U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Chesapeake Bay studies is to provide integrated science for improved understanding and management of the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem. Collective USGS efforts in the Chesapeake Bay watershed began in the 1980s, and by the mid-1990s the USGS adopted the watershed as one of its national place-based study areas. Great focus and effort by the USGS have been directed toward Chesapeake Bay studies for almost three decades. The USGS plays a key role in using “ecosystem-based adaptive management, which will provide science to improve the efficiency and accountability of Chesapeake Bay Program activities” (Phillips, 2011). Each year USGS Chesapeake Bay studies produce published research, monitoring data, and models addressing aspects of bay restoration such as, but not limited to, fish health, water quality, land-cover change, and habitat loss. The USGS is responsible for collaborating and sharing this information with other Federal agencies and partners as described under the President’s Executive Order 13508—Strategy for Protecting and Restoring the Chesapeake Bay Watershed signed by President Obama in 2009. Historically, the USGS Chesapeake Bay studies have relied on national USGS databases to store only major nationally available sources of data such as streamflow and water-quality data collected through local monitoring programs and projects, leaving a multitude of other important project data out of the data management process. This practice has led to inefficient methods of finding Chesapeake Bay studies data and underutilization of data resources. Data management by definition is “the business functions that develop and execute plans, policies, practices and projects that acquire, control, protect, deliver and enhance the value of data and information.” (Mosley, 2008a). In other words, data management is a way to preserve, integrate, and share data to address the needs of the Chesapeake Bay studies to better manage data resources, work more efficiently with partners, and facilitate holistic watershed science. It is now the goal of the USGS Chesapeake Bay studies to implement an enhanced and all-encompassing approach to data management. This report discusses preliminary efforts to implement a physical data management system for program data that is not replicated nationally through other USGS databases.

Chesapeake Bay↗

USGS2025

Scoping decision-maker needs and science availability to support regional natural capital accounting in the U.S. Colorado River Basin

Natural capital accounting has the potential to yield important policy insights at multiple scales, but there remains a disconnect between regional-scale natural capital accounts and their use for informing policy. In this paper, we propose a roadmap that could lead to the creation of policy-relevant regional accounts, with steps split across an initial scoping phase and a subsequent development phase. We demonstrate the scoping steps in action with an application to the Colorado River Basin (“Basin”), a large watershed in the southwestern United States (U.S.) that has faced aridification and substantial high-profile tradeoffs around the use of its water and other natural resources. Drawing on prior U.S. Geological Survey science co-production efforts, we conducted a series of eight discussion sessions with 41 scientists and science representatives whose work is relevant to Basin water, riparian and riverine ecosystems, upland ecosystems and energy and minerals. We summarise participants' thoughts on key topics and economic linkages, their insights and questions of interest and their recommendations on existing scientific data sources and gaps. We evaluate the suitability of the available data for construction of System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA) Central Framework and SEEA Ecosystem Accounting accounts, including those for land, water, forests, energy and minerals and ecosystems (covering extent, condition and ecosystem services). We present a series of lessons learned during the scoping phase, as well as lessons that could be relevant for future practitioners engaging in the development phase. The information can help guide the development of timely and relevant regional-scale environmental-economic accounts in the U.S. and beyond.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico,↗

USGS1992

Forum on land use and land Cover: Summary report

This report includes the agenda and abstracts of presentations from the Forum on Land Use and Land Cover Data, cohosted by the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), February 25-27,1992 at the USGS National Center in Reston, Virginia. The Forum was conducted under the auspices of the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) and was attended by Federal and State managers of programs that produce and use land use and land cover maps and data in support of environmental analysis, monitoring, and policy development. The goal was to improve opportunities for Federal and State coordination, information exchange, data sharing, and work sharing in land use and land cover mapping.

Book↗

USGS2022

Geohydrology and water quality of the northern and central parts of the Tug Hill glacial aquifer, Jefferson and Oswego Counties, north-central New York

The northern and central parts of the Tug Hill glacial aquifer consist of a 29-mile-long, crescent-shaped, mixture of glaciofluvial, glaciolacustrine, and recent alluvial deposits of predominantly sand and gravel on the western side of the Tug Hill Plateau in Jefferson and Oswego Counties in north-central New York. Approximately 11,400 people are supplied by groundwater that is withdrawn from municipal and nonmunicipal wells in the northern and central parts of the aquifer. In addition, many farms, several industries, and a large New York State fish hatchery also rely on the water from the aquifer. In the early 2000s, anticipated developmental pressures from potential new industries (including a proposed water-bottling plant in the central part of the Tug Hill glacial aquifer) and expansion of the Fort Drum military base north of Watertown (with the projected increase in population extending into the northern part of the aquifer) prompted the Tug Hill Commission, local municipal officials, and representatives from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation to initiate a geohydrologic study with the U.S. Geological Survey. The information from this study is intended to help the state, counties, and local communities make sound policy decisions about their use of this large groundwater resource. The northern part of the Tug Hill glacial aquifer is a combination of glaciofluvial outwash and alluvial sand and gravel in the Sandy Creek Valley northeast of Adams, New York, and mostly glaciolacustrine beach and deltaic sand or sand and gravel north and south of the village of Adams. The southern and eastern areas of the central part of the aquifer are composed mostly of glaciofluvial sediments such as kames, kame moraines, and kame terraces, whereas most of the western areas of the central part are composed mostly of glaciolacustrine sediments such as deltaic sand and beach sand and gravel. The northern and central parts of the aquifer are unconfined. Recharge to the northern and central parts of the aquifer is from three main sources: (1) precipitation that falls directly onto the aquifer; (2) unchannelized runoff (overland flow) and groundwater from till and bedrock in the Tug Hill Plateau that seeps into the eastern side of the aquifer; and (3) streams that drain the Tug Hill Plateau and flow across and lose water to the aquifer. Groundwater discharges to springs, seeps, headwaters of streams, and wetlands in the middle area of the central part of the aquifer and along the entire western boundary of the northern and central parts of the aquifer; pumping wells; artificial ditches; and deeply incised streams in the northern and central parts of the aquifer. The groundwater discharge to such streams is critical in supporting the salmonid fishery in the central part of the aquifer. Groundwater levels were measured on July 17, 2014, at 22 wells throughout the northern and central parts of the aquifer. Water-table contours were drawn on the basis of the measured July 2014 water levels, historical water-level data, and surface-water levels where surface water in the channels was expected to be hydraulically connected to the groundwater system. The water table generally slopes from east to west throughout the northern and central parts of the aquifer; this slope also indicates that the direction of groundwater flow is generally from east to west. Water-quality samples were collected from 23 stream sites during base-flow conditions, and groundwater-quality and other types of environmental samples were collected from 20 wells in the northern and central parts of the Tug Hill glacial aquifer. The results of the sampling indicate that surface water and groundwater are generally of good quality. Comparison of the median concentration values of major ions in groundwater samples indicated that hardness in the northern part of the aquifer was about twice as great, and concentrations of calcium and sodium were more than three times as great, as in the central part of the aquifer. As was the case with surface water, the much greater median concentrations in groundwater of calcium, hardness, and alkalinity in the northern part of the aquifer are due to the dissolution of limestone that underlies most of that area and to the high-carbonate content of the clasts in the sand and gravel. There was little to no difference among the median values for bromide, fluoride, silica, and iron in the two parts of the aquifer. Concentrations of most other major ions were slightly greater in the northern part than in the central part of the Tug Hill glacial aquifer, except for magnesium, whose concentration was greater in the central part. Median concentrations of nutrients were generally greatest in surface water and groundwater in the northern part of the aquifer.

New York↗

USGS2019

Speaking the same language: Can the Sustainable Development Goals translate the needs of inland fisheries into irrigation decisions?

Irrigated agriculture and inland fisheries both make important contributions to food security, nutrition, livelihoods, and well-being. Typically, in modern irrigation systems, these components operate independently. Some practices, commonly associated with water use and intensification of crop production, can be in direct conflict with and have adverse impacts on fisheries. Food security objectives may be compromised if fish are not considered in the design phases of irrigation systems. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development provides a framework that can serve as a backdrop to help integrate both sectors in policy discussions and optimize their contributions to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Inland fisheries systems do play an important role in supporting many SDG objectives, but these contributions can sometimes be at odds with irrigated agriculture. Using case studies of two globally important river catchments, the Lower Mekong and Murray-Darling Basins, we highlight the conflicts and opportunities for improved outcomes between irrigated agriculture and inland fisheries. We explore SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) as a path to advance our irrigation systems as a means to benefit both agriculture and inland fisheries, preserving biodiversity and enhancing the economic, environmental, and social benefits they both provide to people.

Marine and Freshwater Research↗

USGS2013

Fort Collins Science Center Ecosystem Dynamics branch--interdisciplinary research for addressing complex natural resource issues across landscapes and time

The Ecosystem Dynamics Branch of the Fort Collins Science Center offers an interdisciplinary team of talented and creative scientists with expertise in biology, botany, ecology, geology, biogeochemistry, physical sciences, geographic information systems, and remote-sensing, for tackling complex questions about natural resources. As demand for natural resources increases, the issues facing natural resource managers, planners, policy makers, industry, and private landowners are increasing in spatial and temporal scope, often involving entire regions, multiple jurisdictions, and long timeframes. Needs for addressing these issues include (1) a better understanding of biotic and abiotic ecosystem components and their complex interactions; (2) the ability to easily monitor, assess, and visualize the spatially complex movements of animals, plants, water, and elements across highly variable landscapes; and (3) the techniques for accurately predicting both immediate and long-term responses of system components to natural and human-caused change. The overall objectives of our research are to provide the knowledge, tools, and techniques needed by the U.S. Department of the Interior, state agencies, and other stakeholders in their endeavors to meet the demand for natural resources while conserving biodiversity and ecosystem services. Ecosystem Dynamics scientists use field and laboratory research, data assimilation, and ecological modeling to understand ecosystem patterns, trends, and mechanistic processes. This information is used to predict the outcomes of changes imposed on species, habitats, landscapes, and climate across spatiotemporal scales. The products we develop include conceptual models to illustrate system structure and processes; regional baseline and integrated assessments; predictive spatial and mathematical models; literature syntheses; and frameworks or protocols for improved ecosystem monitoring, adaptive management, and program evaluation. The descriptions in this fact sheet provide snapshots of our three research emphases, followed by descriptions of select current projects.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2011

Treading lightly on shifting ground: The direction and motivation of future geological research

The future of the geosciences and geological research will involve complex scientific challenges, primarily concerning global and regional environmental issues, in the next 20-30 years. It is quite reasonable to suspect, based on current political and socioeconomic events, that young geoscientists will be faced with and involved in helping to resolve some well defined problems: water and energy security, the effects of anthropogenic climate change, coastal sea level rise and development, and the mitigation of geohazards. It is how we choose to approach these challenges that will define our future. Interdisciplinary applied research, improved modeling and prediction augmented with faster and more sophisticated computing, and a greater role in creating and guiding public policy, will help us achieve our goals of a cleaner and safer Earth environment in the next 30 years. In the far future, even grander possibilities for eliminating the risk of certain geohazards and finding sustainable solutions to our energy needs can be envisioned. Looking deeper into the future, the possibilities for geoscience research push the limits of the imagination.

Episodes↗

USGS2011

Temporal trends in algae, benthic invertebrate, and fish assemblages in streams and rivers draining basins of varying land use in the south-central United States, 1993-2007

Site-specific temporal trends in algae, benthic invertebrate, and fish assemblages were investigated in 15 streams and rivers draining basins of varying land use in the south-central United States from 1993–2007. A multivariate approach was used to identify sites with statistically significant trends in aquatic assemblages which were then tested for correlations with assemblage metrics and abiotic environmental variables (climate, water quality, streamflow, and physical habitat). Significant temporal trends in one or more of the aquatic assemblages were identified at more than half (eight of 15) of the streams in the study. Assemblage metrics and abiotic environmental variables found to be significantly correlated with aquatic assemblages differed between land use categories. For example, algal assemblages at undeveloped sites were associated with physical habitat, while algal assemblages at more anthropogenically altered sites (agricultural and urban) were associated with nutrient and streamflow metrics. In urban stream sites results indicate that streamflow metrics may act as important controls on water quality conditions, as represented by aquatic assemblage metrics. The site-specific identification of biotic trends and abiotic–biotic relations presented here will provide valuable information that can inform interpretation of continued monitoring data and the design of future studies. In addition, the subsets of abiotic variables identified as potentially important drivers of change in aquatic assemblages provide policy makers and resource managers with information that will assist in the design and implementation of monitoring programs aimed at the protection of aquatic resources.

Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, M↗

USGS2013

The airspace is habitat

A preconception concerning habitat persists and has gone unrecognized since use of the term first entered the lexicon of ecological and evolutionary biology many decades ago. Specifically, land and water are considered habitats, while the airspace is not. This might at first seem a reasonable, if unintended, demarcation, since years of education and personal experience as well as limits to perception predispose a traditional view of habitat. Nevertheless, the airspace satisfies the definition and functional role of a habitat, and its recognition as habitat may have implications for policy where expanding anthropogenic development of airspace could impact the conservation of species and subject parts of the airspace to formalized legal protection.

Trends in Ecology and Evolution↗

USGS2009

Ingredients in sustainably managing water in semi-arid environments

The lessons learned from CALFED indicate that ingredients important in the long-term resolution of water management issues may not result in short-term “solutions”. The value of this special issue lies in its identification of ingredients that stimulate re-framing of issues, adapting to new knowledge and innovative decisions. But sustainable water management also requires the political patience to sustain those processes as a means of perpetuating the long-term decision-making necessary to anticipate and/or respond to an ever-changing environment.

Environmental Science and Policy↗

USGS1985

Cost effectiveness of the stream-gaging program in South Carolina

The cost effectiveness of the stream-gaging program in South Carolina was documented for the 1983 water yr. Data uses and funding sources were identified for the 76 continuous stream gages currently being operated in South Carolina. The budget of $422,200 for collecting and analyzing streamflow data also includes the cost of operating stage-only and crest-stage stations. The streamflow records for one stream gage can be determined by alternate, less costly methods, and should be discontinued. The remaining 75 stations should be maintained in the program for the foreseeable future. The current policy for the operation of the 75 stations including the crest-stage and stage-only stations would require a budget of $417,200/yr. The average standard error of estimation of streamflow records is 16.9% for the present budget with missing record included. However, the standard error of estimation would decrease to 8.5% if complete streamflow records could be obtained. It was shown that the average standard error of estimation of 16.9% could be obtained at the 75 sites with a budget of approximately $395,000 if the gaging resources were redistributed among the gages. A minimum budget of $383,500 is required to operate the program; a budget less than this does not permit proper service and maintenance of the gages and recorders. At the minimum budget, the average standard error is 18.6%. The maximum budget analyzed was $850,000, which resulted in an average standard error of 7.6 %. (Author 's abstract)

South Carolina↗

USGS2024

Don’t move a mussel: The role of key environmental drivers and management scale in assessing spatial variation in dreissenid spread risk in the Missouri River Basin

The spread of non-native freshwater mussels in North America is a growing threat that has already resulted in substantial ecological and economic damage to infested areas. A primary vector by which invasive mussels spread is watercraft that are transported over land from an infested waterbody to an uninfested waterbody. Management efforts such as watercraft inspection and detection programs that attempt to intercept infected watercraft can help limit this type of spread, but optimizing the effectiveness of these programs under limited resources is complicated. Studies have looked at developing watercraft inspection and decontamination program strategies that focus on policy-specific objectives such as maximizing the number of infested watercraft interceptions. However, there is limited work that has considered the heterogeneous impact of protection efforts across different regions and waterbodies. Knowledge about this heterogeneity can highlight regions that would benefit the most from protection as well as regions that would require less effort to protect, e.g., areas with naturally unsuitable water quality for dreissenids. To this end, we construct a composite relative risk index (CRR) for watersheds within the Missouri River Basin, a region in the United States on the front line of dreissenid spread. The CRR uses a model that mirrors an expected value model but uses relative indexing as a proxy for the model components. The CRR incorporates a wide array of data sets to account for the direct and indirect damages from a potential infestation along with the risk of an infestation occurring. Our results suggest that the relative priority of a specific watershed—measured through CRR—can depend on whether we consider the entire Missouri River Basin or just the watersheds in the same state. This also indicates substantial state-level heterogeneity in the CRR. Another contribution is that the CRR index includes user-specified weights for certain parameters so that a user can adjust the relative importance of various factors to match their specific context. An accompanying web tool allows users to view the CRR results and adjust multiple parameters to see the resulting impacts on the CCR for watersheds in the Missouri River Basin.

Missouri River Basin↗

USGS2011

Disaster risk assessment case study: Recent drought on the Navajo Nation, USA

The Navajo Nation is an ecologically sensitive semi-arid to arid section of the southern Colorado Plateau. In this remote part of the United States, located at the Four Corners (Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, and Utah), traditional people live a subsistence lifestyle that is inextricably tied to, and dependent upon, landscape conditions and water supplies. Soft bedrock lithologies and sand dunes dominate the region, making it highly sensitive to fluctuations in precipitation intensity, percent vegetation cover, and local land use practices. However, this region has sparse and discontinuous meteorological monitoring records. As a complement to the scant long-term meteorological records and historical documentation, we conducted interviews with 50 Native American elders from the Navajo Nation and compiled their lifetime observations on the changes in water availability, weather, and sand or dust storms. We then used these observations to further refine our understanding of the historical trends and impacts of climate change and drought for the region. In addition to altered landscape conditions due to climatic change, drought, and varying land use practices over the last 130 years, the Navajo people have been affected by federal policies and harsh economic conditions which weaken their cultural fabric. We conclude that a long-term drying trend and decreasing snowpack, superimposed on regional drought cycles, will magnify drought impacts on the Navajo Nation and leave its people increasingly vulnerable.

Report↗

USGS2025

Principles of riverscape health

Riverscapes are the integration of terrestrial and aquatic systems from headwaters to estuaries that provide habitat and ecosystem benefits when in good health. However, current riverscape degradation is pervasive, impairing the function and resulting benefits of these systems. Healthy riverscapes are adaptive and some can ‘heal’ after disturbance with minimal to no human assistance. As riverscape health is threatened, a need exists to address current degradation and understand the potential for riverscape restoration—concisely communicating what comprises healthy riverscapes is essential to direct limited resources and increase efficacy of restoration and conservation efforts. Healthy riverscapes have (i) space to interact within their valley bottom; (ii) natural flow, sediment, and vegetation regimes appropriate to the biophysical setting and river type; and (iii) structural forcing to support diversity and that creates varied residence times for water, sediment, and vegetation. These three principles are grounded in interdisciplinary science and lessons from riverscape scientists and restoration practitioners across the world. Understanding the context, anthropogenic influences, boundary conditions, and legacy effects influencing riverscapes is essential for the appropriate application of these principles in pursuit of achieving riverscape health. Emphasizing a holistic, biogeomorphic view of riverscapes through these principles can guide policies, restoration actions, and monitoring frameworks that ensure that riverscapes remain capable of accommodating and adjusting to disturbances while continuing to support biodiversity and human benefits.

WIREsWATER (Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Primer↗

USGS2010

Fish habitat degradation in U.S. reservoirs

As the median age of the thousands of large reservoirs (> 200 ha) in the United States tops 50, many are showing various signs of fish habitat degradation. Our goal was to identify major factors degrading fish habitat in reservoirs across the country, and to explore regional degradation patterns. An online survey including 14 metrics was scored on a 0 (no degradation) to 5 (high degradation) point scale by 221 fisheries scientists (92% response rate) to describe degradation in 482 reservoirs randomly distributed throughout the continental United States. The highest scored sources of degradation were lack of aquatic macrophytes (41% of the reservoirs scored as 4–5), lack or loss of woody debris (35% scored 4–5), mistimed water level fluctuations (34% scored 4–5), and sedimentation (31% scored 4–5). Factor analysis identified five primary degradation factors that accounted for most of the variability in the 14 degradation metrics. The factors reflected siltation, structural habitat, eutrophication, water regime, and aquatic plants. Three degradation factors were driven principally by in-reservoir processes, whereas the other two were driven by inputs from the watershed. A comparison across U.S. regions indicated significant geographical differences in degradation relative to the factors emphasized by each region. Reservoirs sometimes have been dismissed as unnatural and disruptive, but they are a product of public policy, a critical feature of landscapes, and they cannot be overlooked if managers are to effectively conserve river systems. Protection and restoration of reservoir habitats may be enhanced with a broader perspective that includes watershed management, in addition to in reservoir activities.

Fisheries↗

USGS1988

Ground-water data for Georgia, 1987

This report was prepared in cooperation with the State of Georgia; Chatham County; Glynn County; the cities of Brunswick and Valdosta; and the Albany Water, Gas, and Light Commission. This report is the culmination of a concerted effort by dedicated personnel of the U.S. Geological Survey who collected, compiled, analyzed, verified, and organized the data, and who edited and assembled the report. In addition to the authors, who had primary responsibility for assuring that the information contained herein is accurate, complete, and adheres to Geological Survey policy and established guidelines, the following individuals contributed significantly to the collection, processing, and tabulation of the data:

Georgia↗

USGS2015

Dreissenid mussel research priorities workshop

Currently, dreissenid mussels have yet to be detected in the northwestern part of the United States and western Canada. Infestation of one of the jurisdictions within the mussel-free Pacific Northwest would likely have significant economic, societal and environmental implications for the entire region. Understanding the biology and environmental tolerances of dreissenid mussels, and effectiveness of various management strategies, is key to prevention. On November 4-5, 2015, the Aquatic Bioinvasion Research and Policy Institute and the Center for Lakes and Reservoirs at Portland State University, the US Geological Survey, and the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission, convened a Dreissenid Mussel Research Priorities Workshop funded by the Great Northern Landscape Conservation Cooperative. The purpose of the workshop was to review dreissenid research priorities in the 2010 Quagga-Zebra Mussel Action Plan for Western U.S. Waters, reassess those priorities, incorporate new information and emerging trends, and develop priorities to strategically focus research efforts on zebra and quagga mussels in the Pacific Northwest and ensure that future research is focused on the highest priorities. It is important to note that there is some repetition among dreissenid research priority categories (e.g., prevention, detection, control, monitoring, and biology). Workshop participants with research experience in dreissenid mussel biology and management were identified by a literature review. State and federal agency managers were also invited to the workshop to ensure relevancy and practicality of the workshop outcomes. A total of 28 experts (see sidebar) in mussel biology, ecology, and management attended the workshop.

Conference Paper↗