USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Practicing Planner”

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.

41 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
USGS2017

Modeling watershed-scale impacts of stormwater management with traditional versus low impact development design

Stormwater runoff and associated pollutants from urban areas in the greater Chesapeake Bay Watershed (CBW) impair local streams and downstream ecosystems, despite urbanized land comprising only 7% of the CBW area. More recently, stormwater best management practices (BMPs) have been implemented in a low impact development (LID) manner to treat stormwater runoff closer to its source. This approach included the development of a novel BMP model to compare traditional and LID design, pioneering the use of comprehensively digitized storm sewer infrastructure and BMP design connectivity with spatial patterns in a geographic information system at the watershed scale. The goal was to compare total watershed pollutant removal efficiency in two study watersheds with differing spatial patterns of BMP design (traditional and LID), by quantifying the improved water quality benefit of LID BMP design. An estimate of uncertainty was included in the modeling framework by using ranges for BMP pollutant removal efficiencies that were based on the literature. Our model, using Monte Carlo analysis, predicted that the LID watershed removed approximately 78 kg more nitrogen, 3 kg more phosphorus, and 1,592 kg more sediment per square kilometer as compared with the traditional watershed on an annual basis. Our research provides planners a valuable model to prioritize watersheds for BMP design based on model results or in optimizing BMP selection.

Maryland↗
USGS2022

Quantifying the stormwater runoff volume reduction benefits of urban street tree canopy

Trees in the urban right-of-way areas have increasingly been considered part of a suite of green infrastructure practices used to manage stormwater runoff. A paired-catchment experimental design (with street tree removal as the treatment) was used to assess how street trees affect major hydrologic fluxes in a typical residential stormwater collection and conveyance network. The treatment consisted of removing 29 green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) and two Norway maple (Acer platanoides) street trees from a medium-density residential area. Tree removal resulted in an estimated 198 m3 increase in surface runoff volume compared to the control catchment over the course of the study. This increase accounted for 4% of the total measured runoff after trees were removed. Despite significant changes to runoff volume (p ≤ 0.10), peak discharge was generally not affected by tree removal. On a per-tree basis, 66 L of rainfall per m2 of canopy was lost that would have otherwise been intercepted and stored. Runoff volume reduction benefit was estimated at 6376 L per tree. These values experimentally document per-capita retention services rendered by trees over a growing season with 42 storm events. These values are within the range reported by previous studies, which largely relied on simulation. This study provides catchment scale evidence that reducing stormwater runoff is one of many ecosystem services provided by street trees. This study quantifies these services, based on site conditions and a mix of deciduous species, and serves to improve our ability to account for this important yet otherwise poorly constrained hydrologic service. Engineers, city planners, urban foresters, and others involved with the management of urban stormwater can use this information to better understand tradeoffs involved in using green infrastructure to reduce urban runoff burden.

Wisconsin↗
USGS1999

Environmental processes that affect mineral deposits in the eastern United States

A thorough understanding of the environmental processes that affect mineral deposits and mine wastes has become increasingly important as the Nation wrestles with how to meet our current demand for metals without compromising the environment and how to mitigate the damage caused by the mining practices of previous generations. Regulatory requirements are dominated by empirical approaches to environmental problems associated with mining, but mitigation and reclamation can be enhanced greatly by a theoretical and conceptual understanding of the processes that affect the availability, transport, and fixation of metals and the generation of acidic waters. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) research efforts in the Eastern United States are concentrating on environmental processes that affect a class of mineral deposits known as massive sulfide deposits. These occurrences were valued historically for their sulfur content and recently for their metals. This deposit type is a research priority because of its economic significance and high potential for adverse environmental impact due to its high sulfide content and the low acid-buffering capacity of host rocks. Numerous examples of these deposits are found in the East, including reclaimed mine sites, abandoned mines, active mines, and sites currently in the permitting process for future production. Published studies of mine drainage chemistry from the Iron Mountain massive sulfide deposit in California have documented extreme conditions of very low pH and high heavy-metal concentrations. These extreme conditions are attributed to the unique hydrologic and climatic settings of the deposit and probably are independent of the mineral deposit type. Areas currently under study include Bald Mountain, Maine, the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, the Vermont copper belt, Contrary Creek, Virginia, and Prince William Forest Park, Virginia (fig.1). Goals of the research are (1) to give land-use planners and the mining industry a better empirical framework from which to assess potential environmental impacts of mining, particularly under eastern climatic conditions, and (2) to provide a better theoretical and conceptual framework from which to design more effective and cost efficient mitigation and reclamation programs.

Information Handout↗
USGS2011

The USA National Phenology Network; taking the pulse of our planet

People have tracked phenology for centuries and for the most practical reasons: it helped them know when to hunt and fish, when to plant and harvest crops, and when to navigate waterways. Now phenology is being used as a tool to assess climate change and its effects on both natural and modified ecosystems. How is the timing of events in plant and animal life cycles, like flowering or migration, responding to climate change? And how are those responses, in turn, affecting people and ecosystems? The USA National Phenology Network (the Network) is working to answer these questions for science and society by promoting a broad understanding of plant and animal phenology and their relationship to environmental change. The Network is a consortium of organizations and individuals that collect, share, and use phenology data, models, and related information to enable scientists, resource managers, and the public to adapt in response to changing climates and environments. In addition, the Network encourages people of all ages and backgrounds to observe and record phenology as a way to discover and explore the nature and pace of our dynamic world. The National Coordinating Office (NCO) of the Network is a resource center that facilitates and encourages widespread collection, integration, and sharing of phenology data and related information (for example, meteorological and hydrological data). The NCO develops and promotes standardized methods for field data collection and maintains several online user interfaces for data upload and download, as well as data exploration, visualization, and analysis. The NCO also facilitates basic and applied research related to phenology, the development of decision-support tools for resource managers and planners, and the design of educational and outreach materials

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2007

Ohio Aquatic Gap Analysis-An Assessment of the Biodiversity and Conservation Status of Native Aquatic Animal Species

The goal of the GAP Analysis Program is to keep common species common by identifying those species and habitats that are not yet adequately represented in the existing matrix of conservation lands. The Gap Analysis Program (GAP) is sponsored by the Biological Resources Discipline of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). The Ohio Aquatic GAP (OH-GAP) is a pilot project that is applying the GAP concept to aquatic-specifically, riverine-data. The mission of GAP is to provide regional assessments of the conservation status of native animal species and to facilitate the application of this information to land-management activities. OH-GAP accomplished this through * mapping aquatic habitat types, * mapping the predicted distributions of fish, crayfish, and bivalves, * documenting the presence of aquatic species in areas managed for conservation, * providing GAP results to the public, planners, managers, policy makers, and researchers, and * building cooperation with multiple organizations to apply GAP results to state and regional management activities. Gap analysis is a coarse-scale assessment of aquatic biodiversity and conservation; the goal is to identify gaps in the conservation of native aquatic species. It is not a substitute for biological field studies and monitoring programs. Gap analysis was conducted for the continuously flowing streams in Ohio. Lakes, reservoirs, wetlands, and the Lake Erie islands were not included in this analysis. The streams in Ohio are in the Lake Erie and Ohio River watersheds and pass through six of the level III ecoregions defined by Omernik: the Eastern Corn Belt Plains, Southern Michigan/Northern Indiana Drift Plains, Huron/Erie Lake Plain, Erie Drift Plains, Interior Plateau, and the Western Allegheny Plateau. To characterize the aquatic habitats available to Ohio fish, crayfish, and bivalves, a classification system needed to be developed and mapped. The process of classification includes delineation of areas of relative homogeneity and labeling these areas using categories defined by the classification system. The variables were linked to the 1:100,000-scale streams of the National Hydrography Dataset of the USGS. Through discussions with Ohio aquatic experts, OH-GAP identified eight separate enduring physical features which, when combined, form the physical habitat type: * Shreve link (a measure of stream size) * Downstream Shreve link (a measure of stream connectivity and size) * Sinuosity * Gradient * Bedrock * Stream temperature * Character of glacial drift * Glacial-drift thickness Potential distribution models were developed for 130 fish, 70 bivalve, and 17 native crayfish species. These models are based on 5,686 fish, 4,469 crayfish, and 2,899 freshwater bivalve (mussels and clams) sampling locations, the variables describing the physical habitat types, and variables indicating the major drainage basins and Omernik's Level III ecoregion. All potential species distributions are displayed and analyzed at the 14-digit hydrologic unit (14-HUs), or subwatershed, level. Mainland Ohio contains 1,749 14-HUs. All statistics and conclusions, as well as spatial data, are discussed and presented in terms of these units. The Ohio Aquatic Gap Analysis Project compiled a map of public and private conservation lands and OH-GAP classified the lands into four status categories (status 1 through status 4) by the degree of protection offered based on management practices. A status of 1 denotes the highest, most permanent level of maintenance, and status 4 represents the lowest level of biodiversity management, or unknown status. The results of this mapping show that only about 3.7 percent of the state's land (4.3 percent if lakes and reservoirs are also included) is protected for conservation, either publicly or privately. Of this total, state agencies control about 52 percent, and Federal agencies control about 29 percent. Conservation areas that presently protect

Open-File Report↗