USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Research”

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 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
USGS2023

Gulf Islands National Seashore regional sediment budget research and data needs—Workshop series summary

Executive Summary The National Park Service (NPS), in collaboration with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), recognizes the need to quantify the sediment budget of the barrier islands within the Gulf Islands National Seashore (GINS) to understand the coastal processes affecting island resiliency. To achieve this goal, identifying and quantifying the physical parameters that drive long-term change is necessary to model the processes that are both generative and terminal in island evolution and capture island response to long-term human alteration and climatic patterns. For example, measuring change across periods of storminess is more effective at assessing island resiliency than measuring change resulting from a single storm impact. Understanding changes to the physical environment over time is key to successfully predicting island responses to future storm impacts, human alteration, and sea-level rise and is necessary for effective decision making and management response. Yet, the diversity of factors affecting natural and cultural resources necessitates a strategic approach to data collection priorities that can inform sediment budget quantification and integrated resource management. This study sought to advance sediment budget modeling efforts by conducting a “Needs Assessment Workshop” at the GINS. The purpose of the workshop was to identify and prioritize the specific research and data needs regarding the sediment budget at the GINS that can enhance the NPS efforts to conserve the islands’ natural resources, cultural resources, and the facilities and infrastructure that support both conservation and visitor use of those resources. This effort explored two research questions: (1) “what research and data needs exist for the sediment budget at Gulf Islands National Seashore” (research question 1) and (2) “how can research to address these needs capitalize on regional partnerships to advance natural and cultural resource conservation at Gulf Islands National Seashore” (research question 2)? The workshop was conducted virtually in a two-part, two-day series. The workshop series was organized by researchers from North Carolina State University in collaboration with NPS and USGS staff and was facilitated by National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration staff. The workshop series (two paired, sequential, partial-day workshops) addressed two target audiences: (1) NPS and USGS staff (April workshop) and (2) regional Federal, State, county, and nongovernmental organization staff, including NPS and USGS staff (May workshop). A total of four workshop sessions were held, comprising two sessions with each target audience. The workshop series intended to identify sediment management research and data needs that could enhance natural and cultural resource stewardship at the GINS. One objective was to share information about regional sediment transport and management, available sediment management plans, and predictive modeling capabilities, including geomorphologic and hydrodynamic predictive models. This information was shared through a series of presentations by park managers and NPS and USGS researchers that identified park issues and available capabilities and data. The second objective was to elicit research and data needs, with a primary goal of assessing the importance and urgency of the identified needs. This assessment was partly determined by requesting that the workshop participants identify and prioritize research themes through polls, comments, and discussion. The polls explicitly asked participants to qualitatively evaluate the importance (not at all, slightly, somewhat, very, or extremely) and urgency (not at all, slightly, somewhat, very, or extremely) of the thematically grouped research and data needs. These evaluations were plotted and shared during the workshop to visualize how the relative importance ( x -axis) and relative urgency ( y -axis) of each “need,” relative to other needs, to identify the most necessary (importance) and time-sensitive (urgent) items, thereby allowing an enhanced, holistic understanding of the sediment budget at GINS. Results of the poll are published as a USGS data release. The assessment results revealed that the most important and urgent research and data needs included mapping (for example, elevation, habitat, and cultural resources), a regional sediment budget and management plan, and the dynamic modeling of sediment processes. During the workshop, these issues were visualized using scatter plots to demonstrate the relative importance and urgency of each theme, provide descriptive statistics, and elicit discussion. This format of iterative presentation, discussion, and prioritization allowed the project team to effectively accomplish their objective of identifying important and urgent research needs for natural and cultural resource stewardship at the GINS. Through the workshop, it was determined that expanded communication with the broader research community was needed to coordinate research activities and streamline potential funding opportunities and that research and policy should be integrated through a structured decision-making process. At the conclusion of the workshop, an administered poll showed that the presentations effectively identified data and research needs and that the goals of the workshop were achieved. The results suggest that this type of needs-assessment workshop can effectively identify existing research capabilities and data, determine and prioritize research and data needs, and address how these efforts can use regional partnerships to aid natural and cultural resource conservation and management at National Parks.

Florida, Mississippi↗
USGS2019

A collaborative approach to bridging the gap between wildlife managers and researchers

Although most wildlife professionals agree that science should inform wildlife management decisions, disconnect still exists between researchers and managers. If researchers are not striving to incorporate their findings into management decisions, support for research programs by managers can wane. If managers are not using research findings to inform management decisions, those decisions may be less effective or more vulnerable to legal challenges. Both of these situations can have negative consequences for wildlife conservation. We outline a collaborative research‐management approach to bridging the gap between wildlife managers and researchers. We describe differences in perspectives, perceptions, and priorities between managers and researchers; outline how and why the divide between researchers and managers has likely occurred and continues to grow; and present specific strategies and recommendations to foster stronger collaborations between managers and researchers. We advocate increased synergy between managers and researchers based on a shared vision of conservation and a collaborative structure that rewards researchers and managers. Most importantly, we suggest that relationships and communication between managers and researchers must be established early in research development and decision‐making processes, fostering the trust needed for collaboration. Institutions and agencies can facilitate these relationships by creating opportunities and incentives for integrating collaborative research into management decisions. We suggest this approach will strengthen ties between researchers and managers, increase relevance of research to management decisions, promote effectiveness of management decisions, reduce legal challenges, and ultimately produce positive, tangible, and lasting effects on wildlife conservation.

Journal of Wildlife Management↗
USGS2005

Attitudinal survey component of the study Quantity, quality, and support for research in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: An organizational assessment : Report of methods and frequencies

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is responsible for managing the Nation’s fish and wildlife resources so that these trust resources are preserved for the present and future use and enjoyment of the citizens of the United States. The FWS achieves this mission by managing many programs. These include the national system of refuges and fish hatcheries, Fish and Wildlife Management Assistance Offices, migratory birds program, law enforcement, and working with tribal, state, and other Federal agencies to ensure protection of threatened and endangered species. Another role of the FWS is consulting with tribal, state, and other Federal agencies and private sector interests on the best conservation management practices consistent with Federal law. Each of these activities requires a workforce that is recognized for its professionalism, dedication to public service, and command of expert knowledge. Recognition for expert knowledge in fish and wildlife conservation is demonstrated, in part, when FWS personnel direct, conduct, or report research that is well-designed to answer questions of importance for natural resource management. The data reported in this document are one part of a three-part study of the status of organizational support for research in FWS, which was commissioned by the Directorate of the FWS. Funding for this study was provided by the FWS, and the Science Support Program of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). In 1994, the biological research functions of the FWS were transferred to the National Biological Survey, and subsequently into the USGS. This transfer was principally accomplished by moving whole research units from one agency to another. The result was that some employees whose positions were involved with research were not transferred. In addition, some research, information, and management needs of the FWS have continued to be met by studies conducted within the FWS itself. Although the FWS relies on the USGS and others for most basic research investigations, the FWS also conducts its own studies to meet management needs. Because it is vital for FWS employees to be able to conduct such tactical and applied research tasks in a timely manner, the agency must promote the culture necessary to support and encourage these activities. Such research activities are spread widely across the various programs of the FWS, and there is presently no collective, formal, or systematic record of planned or existing research activities. In commissioning this organizational assessment research, the Directorate of the FWS recognized that it would be to the advantage of the agency to more fully understand its research capacity. To develop a clearer picture of the nature, extent, quality, and degree of administrative support available for conducting research within the FWS, investigations have been undertaken to: 1. identify positions in the FWS that may include, in whole or in part, a component of scientific research; 2. identify organizational units within the FWS that may conduct research as a significant portion of their mission; and 3. assess the attitudes of employees and managers about the obstacles and opportunities for scientific research existing within the FWS by using a scaled-response survey instrument. The findings presented in this report represent the basic results derived from the attitude assessment survey conducted in the last quarter of 2004. The findings set forth in this report are the frequency distributions for each question in the survey instrument for all respondents. The only statistics provided are descriptive in character - namely, means and associated standard deviations.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2013

Seventy-five years of science—The U.S. Geological Survey’s Western Fisheries Research Center

As of January 2010, 75 years have elapsed since Dr. Frederic Fish initiated the pioneering research program that would evolve into today’s Western Fisheries Research Center (WFRC). Fish began his research working alone in the basement of the recently opened Fisheries Biological Laboratory on Lake Union in Seattle, Washington. WFRC’s research began under the aegis of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and ends its first 75 years as part of the U.S. Geological Survey with a staff of more than 150 biologists and support personnel and a heritage of fundamental research that has made important contributions to our understanding of the biology and ecology of the economically important fish and fish populations of the Nation. Although the current staff may rarely stop to think about it, WFRC’s antecedents extend many years into the past and are intimately involved with the history of fisheries conservation in the Western United States. Thus, WFRC Director Lyman Thorsteinson asked me to write the story of this laboratory “while there are still a few of you around who were here for some of the earlier years” to document the rich history and culture of WFRC by recognizing its many famous scientists and their achievements. This historyalso would help document WFRC’s research ‘footprint’ in the Western United States and its strategic directions. Center Director Thorsteinson concluded that WFRC’s heritage told by an emeritus scientist also would add a texture of legitimacy based on personal knowledge that will all-to-soon be lost to the WFRC and to the USGS. The WFRC story is important for the future as well as for historical reasons. It describes how we got to the place we are today by documenting the origin, original mission, and our evolving role in response to the constantly changing technical information requirements of new environmental legislation and organizational decision-making. The WFRC research program owes its existence to the policy requirements of Federal conservation legislation originating with the construction of Grand Coulee Dam in 1933. The research program was shaped by laws enacted in subsequent years such as the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (1972), National Environmental Policy Act (1973), Endangered Species Act (1974), and Northwest Power Planning Act (1980), to name only a few. The WFRC has not been constrained by direct management or regulatory responsibility for a particular fishery (such as providing sustainable catch limits data to a resource management structure). Thus, WFRC has been able to concentrate on scientific pursuits and information needs required by contemporary environmental legislation. Over the years, we have pioneered in several important areas of fisheries research including the diagnoses and control of diseases in economically important fish, effects of environmental alterations on the physiological quality and survival of Pacific salmon released from federal mitigation hatcheries, applications in biotelemetry, and the bioenergetics of predator-prey interactions in the Columbia River. The WFRC of today is a widely distributed organization in the Western United States. Knowledge of the historical connections and accomplishments of our predecessors is important beyond the sense of pride and unity it instills in the WFRC family of today. For example, a discerning reader will note the evolution of WFRC’s research from a single disciplinary focus (early era—hatchery disease problems), to multiple disciplines (middle to late era—species, populations, habitats; threatened and endangered species), to the present era (multidisciplinary and with increasing process focus). For the benefit of the current WFRC staff, more emphasis has been placed on the early years rather than on the present day because people are quite naturally more familiar with the recent past than with the research done during the first decades of WFRC’s existence. By every rational measure, the WFRC has evolved into a fisheries research organization well positioned to provide the biological information needed to support the continued conservation and management of our Nation’s living aquatic natural resources. The high standard of excellence that connects WFRC’s past to our present research program provides a firm foundation on which to base the work yet to be done. In another 75 years, WFRC will undoubtedly be a very different place than it is today, but its evolution will be forever rooted in the story of the research and of the people related here. More about the diverse fisheries research projects WFRC scientists are conducting today is available at WFRC’s website: http://wfrc.usgs.gov/.

Washington↗
USGS2014

Guidelines for use of fishes in research: Revised and expanded

The Guidelines for the Use of Fishes in Research (2014; 2014 Guidelines ), now available through the American fisheries Society (AFS) website and in print from the AFS bookstore, is a resource to aid researchers and regulatory authorities regarding responsible, scientifically valid research on fish and aquatic wildlife. The Guidelines for the Use of Fishes in Field Research (American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists [ASIH] et al. 1987, 1988) emphasized field research and was followed by the 2004 Guidelines including laboratory research topics. Each version of the Guidelines has been jointly endorsed and/or published by the ASIH, the American Institute of Fishery Research Biologists (AIFRB), and AFS--each focusing on the scientific understanding, global conservation, and sustainability of aquatic animals, fisheries, and ecosystems. Changes with time necessitate revisions to make the Guidelines consistent with contemporary practices and scientific literature so to remain relevant as a technical resource. This document provides not only general principles relevant for field and laboratory research endeavors but includes specific requirements for researchers working within the United States and outside of the country. Within the scope of their expertise, the 2014 Uses of Fishers in Research (UFR) Committee members updated and revised sections, resulting in a 90-page 2014 Guidelines having undergone through peer review. As before, topical areas were addressed (see Table of Contents on page 416). Expanded coverage was provided on U.S. and international agencies and programs relevant to research with fishes. The Surgical Procedures and the Marking and Tagging section received special focus by a UFR Subcommittee. Feeds and Feeding and the Administration of Drugs, Biologics and Other Chemicals are just some of the newly added topics. The 2014 Guidelines is user-friendly by way of hyperlinks to external Internet sites, intradocument sections, and tables of acronyms with corresponding terms, low regulatory priority drugs, and Office of International des Epizooties notifiable disease agents. Again, the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) role is explained, expectations for research are provided, and a brief checklist for IACUC readiness is included. Overall, the ,i>2014 Guidelines is the taxon-specific resource for our professional societies and is a principal document for standards on the care and use of fish and aquatic vertebrates in research.

Fisheries↗
USGS2006

Integrating Stakeholders and Users into the Geography Discipline's Research Process

Future research priorities of Geography emphasize the discipline's leadership role in the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in multidisciplinary and integrated research on human and environmental systems and how these systems are interrelated and respond to change Geography's research priorities also emphasize providing science that is usable to society and creating decision support products applicable to given customer problems. To achieve these goals, we must understand the relationship between our research and our customer, and how to integrate the customer into the research process. This report details the elements of the research process that help achieve the degree of stakeholder involvement necessary to ensure a successful end-product. It offers suggestions that can help researchers better understand stakeholders and customers and involve them in the research process more effectively, while preserving the integrity of the science. Its aim is to help researchers understand the problems and challenges faced by our customers and communicate the ways in which Geography can help address their problems. Adopting these guidelines can improve the efficiency of the research process and lead to higher quality output. We will be able to conduct better research because we will have an improved understanding of the research problem and the stakeholders involved. This report covers a broad range of topics, from identifying and communicating with stakeholders and users, to the use of language, to how to effectively present scientific information to the user. It does not offer a 'one size fits all' method. Instead, perhaps only specific sections are suitable for a given project and customers, depending on project scope and needs. This report is based on the objectives of Geography's strategic plan, U. S. Geological Survey's strategic plan, and Department of Interior's strategic plan. Section 2 of these guidelines describes the purpose of the research process in Geography and the need for better user involvement in the process. Section 3 explains how to conduct a stakeholder analysis. Section 4 explains how to conduct a user-needs assessment.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2013

Greater Sage-Grouse National Research Strategy

The condition of the sagebrush ecosystem has been declining in the Western United States, and greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus), a sagebrush-obligate species, has experienced concurrent decreases in distribution and population numbers. This has prompted substantial research and management over the past two decades to improve the understanding of sage-grouse and its habitats and to address the observed decreases in distribution and population numbers. The amount of research and management has increased as the year 2015 approaches, which is when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is expected to make a final decision about whether or not to protect the species under the Endangered Species Act. In 2012, the Sage-Grouse Executive Oversight Committee (EOC) of the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (WAFWA) requested that the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) lead the development of a Greater Sage-Grouse National Research Strategy (hereafter Research Strategy). This request was motivated by a practical need to systematically connect existing research and conservation plans with persisting or emerging information needs. Managers and researchers also wanted to reduce redundancy and help focus limited funds on the highest priority research and management issues. The USGS undertook the development of this Research Strategy, which addresses information and science relating to the greater sage-grouse and its habitat across portions of 11 Western States. This Research Strategy provides an outline of important research topics to ensure that science information gaps are identified and documented in a comprehensive manner. Further, by identifying priority topics and critical information needed for planning, research, and resource management, it provides a structure to help coordinate members of an expansive research and management community in their efforts to conduct priority research.

California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Nort↗