USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Resources Policy”

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 541 records · Page 30Linked to original sources
USGS2011

Synthesis of the effects to fish species of two management scenarios for the secretarial determination on removal of the lower four dams on the Klamath River

For decades the long-standing conflict in the Klamath River Basin over water and fish resources has persisted. In an effort to resolve these disputes, PacifiCorp and interested parties negotiated, wrote, and signed the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement (KHSA) in 2010, calling for the potential removal of the four lower dams on the Klamath River mainstem. The KHSA established a process known as the Secretarial Determination, which includes 1) conducting new scientific studies and a re-evaluation of existing studies found in the FERC record and from other sources, and 2) evaluating the potential environmental and human effects of such an action pursuant to National Environmental Policy Act, California Environmental Quality Act, and other applicable laws. In March 2012, the Secretary of the Interior will decide whether removal of these dams on the Klamath River: 1) will advance salmonid fisheries, and 2) is in the public interest. In this report, we summarize anticipated effects to fish resources under two management scenarios: 1) current conditions with dams in place and without the programs and actions in the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA), and 2) removal of the lower four dams plus programs and actions called for in the KBRA and KHSA. This information will aid the Secretary of the Interior in determining whether dam removal and implementation of KBRA will advance restoration of salmonid (salmon and trout) fisheries.

California, Oregon↗
USGS2013

Methods to assess geological CO 2 storage capacity: Status and best practice

To understand the emission reduction potential of carbon capture and storage (CCS), decision makers need to understand the amount of CO 2 that can be safely stored in the subsurface and the geographical distribution of storage resources. Estimates of storage resources need to be made using reliable and consistent methods. Previous estimates of CO 2 storage potential for a range of countries and regions have been based on a variety of methodologies resulting in a correspondingly wide range of estimates. Consequently, there has been uncertainty about which of the methodologies were most appropriate in given settings, and whether the estimates produced by these methods were useful to policy makers trying to determine the appropriate role of CCS. In 2011, the IEA convened two workshops which brought together experts for six national surveys organisations to review CO 2 storage assessment methodologies and make recommendations on how to harmonise CO 2 storage estimates worldwide. This report presents the findings of these workshops and an internationally shared guideline for quantifying CO 2 storage resources.

Report↗
USGS2012

Coordinated bird monitoring: Technical recommendations for military lands

The Department of Defense (DoD) is subject to several rules and regulations establishing responsibilities for monitoring migratory birds. The Sikes Act requires all military installations with significant natural resources to prepare and implement Integrated Natural Resources Management Plans (INRMPs). These plans guide the conservation and long-term management of natural resources on military lands in a manner that is compatible with and sustains the military mission. An INRMP also supports compliance with all legal requirements and guides the military in fulfilling its obligation to be a good steward of public land.The management and conservation of migratory birds is addressed in installation INRMPs. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies to evaluate and disclose the potential environmental impacts of their proposed actions. More recently, DoD signed an MOU (http://www.dodpif.org/downloads/EO13186_MOU-DoD.pdf) for migratory birds, under Executive Order 13186, with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in July 2006 and a Migratory Bird Rule (http://www.dodpif.org/downloads/MigBirdFINALRule_FRFeb2007.pdf) was passed by Congress in February 2007. The Migratory Bird Rule addresses the potential impacts of military readiness activities on populations of migratory birds and establishes a process to implement conservation measures if and when a military readiness activity is expected to have a significant adverse impact on a population of migratory bird species (as determined through the NEPA process). The MOU states that for nonmilitary readiness activities, prior to initiating any activity likely to affect populations of migratory birds DoD shall (1) identify the migratory bird species likely to occur in the area of the proposed action and determine if any species of concern could be affected by the activity, and (2) assess and document, using NEPA when applicable, the effect of the proposed action on species of concern. By following these procedures, DoD will minimize the possibility for a proposed action to unintentionally take migratory birds at a level that would violate any of the migratory bird treaties and potentially impact mission activities. In addition, implementing conservation and monitoring programs for migratory birds supports the ecosystem integrity necessary to sustain DoD's natural resources for the military mission.Non-compliance with the procedural requirements of the MBTA could result in a private party lawsuit under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). A lawsuit filed under APA involving a Navy bombing range is the basis for a court ruling that unintentional take of migratory birds applies to federal actions. Ensuring the necessary data is available to adequately assess impacts of a proposed action will help avoid lawsuits or help ensure such lawsuits have no grounds. The data gathered in a bird monitoring program will provide the best scientific data available to assess the expected impacts of a proposed action on migratory bird species through the NEPA process. This report presents recommendations developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the Department of Defense (DoD) on establishing a "Coordinated Bird Monitoring (CBM) Plan." The CBM Plan is intended to ensure that DoD meets its conservation and regulatory responsibilities for monitoring birds (Chapter 1). The report relies heavily on recommendations in the report, "Opportunities for improving avian monitoring" (http://www.nabci-us.org/aboutnabci/monitoringreportfinal0307.pdf), by the U.S. North American Bird Conservation Initiative (U.S. NABCI Monitoring Subcommittee, 2007) and on a review of 358 current DoD bird monitoring programs carried out as part of this project (Chapter 2). This report contains 12 recommendations which, if followed, would result in a comprehensive, efficient, and useful approach to bird monitoring. The recommendations are based on the entire report but are presented together at the end of Chapter 1. DoD has agreed to consider implementing these recommendations; however, final decisions will be based upon such factors as the availability of resources and military mission considerations. These recommendations from USGS can be summarized into 6 major themes: A major report on monitoring was released in 2007 by the U.S. North American Bird Conservation Initiative (http://www.nabci-us.org/main2.html). DoD can be consistent with this report by establishing policy that monitoring will be explicitly acknowledged as an integral element of bird management and conservation (Recommendation 1). The design of monitoring and assessment programs for birds should include the following steps: Preparation of a document describing the program's goals, objectives, and methods similar to a format we provide (Recommendation 2, Chapter 4). Selection of field methods using an "expert system" developed in this project (Recommendation 3, Chapter 5) or another well-documented system. Preparation and storage of metadata describing the monitoring program in the Natural Resources Monitoring Partnership (NRMP), and other appropriate databases Recommendation 4, Chapter 6). Entry of the survey data using eBird (http://ebird.org/content/dod) or the Coordinated Bird Monitoring Database (CBMD) and long-term storage of the data in the CBMD and the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN; Recommendation 5, Chapter 6; http://www.avianknowledge.net/). Submission of major results from the monitoring program for publication in a peer reviewed journal (Recommendation 6). The DoD Legacy Resource Management Program (Legacy; https://www.dodlegacy.org), Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP; http://www.serdp.org/), and Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP; http://www.serdp.org/) should be encouraged to continue their significant contributions to the foundations of bird monitoring (Recommendation 7, Chapters 1 and 3). Appropriate monitoring should be conducted to identify species of concern on installations. A year-round, one-time survey of birds on installations with habitat for migratory birds would provide the most information to assist compliance with the MOU, the Final Rule, and the NEPA analyses of proposed actions. However, less intensive survey efforts can still be conducted to yield useful information. We describe how various levels of survey effort might be organized and conducted. In addition, continuing surveys, as feasible, would further assist in documenting effects of military readiness and non-readiness activities on species of concern (SOC) (Recommendation 8, Chapter 7). Participation in well-designed, large-scale surveys [(e.g., North American Breeding Bird Survey (BBS; http://www.pwrc.usgs.gov/bbs/), Monitoring Avian Productivity and Survivorship (MAPS; http://www.birdpop.org/maps.htm)] on land that DoD manages or on lands where the results will be of high interest to DoD, will provide DoD and other NABCI members with information important to bird conservation (Recommendation 9, Chapter 8). Review and implementation of the CBM Plan should involve both higher level management and installation-level natural resources managers (Recommendation 11), be implemented through cooperative partnerships (Recommendation 12), and be followed on U.S territory lands and Army Corps of Engineers projects (Recommendation 10).Additional recommendations that pertain to implementing the DoD CBM Plan are discussed in Chapter 9.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2001

Transboundary movement of airborne pollutants — A methodology for integrating spaceborne images and ground based data

The availability of relevant and accurate environmental information is essential for environmental policy-makers. Recent improvements in satellite remote sensing technologies, groundbased monitors, and data access have resulted in the ability to observe and assess major atmospheric and ecological events around the world on a timely basis Each of these monitoring technologies reveals different and useful information, yet rarely are the resulting data sets used together in an integrated manner. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Global Resource Information Database (GRID) office in Sioux Falls identified an environmental issue of global interest as a test case for applying an integrated approach: the transboundary movement of atmospheric pollutants. Transboundary movement of atmospheric pollutants has ramifications for human and environmental health, as well as economic impacts. As a result, it is the focus of many bilateral, regional, and international policy efforts. A central question with atmospheric pollutant transport is how to monitor pollutant movement and how to merge different monitoring datasets into useful information. Highly visible regional plumes of dust, smoke, and urban haze can be seen with satellite sensors, while ground-based monitoring of air pollutants such as fine particulates, SO2 , and toxics occurs at the local level. Integration of these two kinds of measurements allows the user to remotely observe large environmental effects in many areas of the world, while obtaining more detailed information from ground-based monitors. Hence, the combination of satellite-based sensor data and ground-based monitoring data promotes greater understanding of the movement of pollutants than either data set alone. Combined data sets are important for use by both scientists and international policy-makers. A standard methodology did not exist to guide and encourage integrated use of satellite images and ground-based data to monitor and understand major pollution events, such as air pollution. Thus, a small team was assembled to develop a methodology for the integration of satellite images and ground-based data. First, we conducted a literature and project review covering past and current integrated remote and ground-based data projects, a literature search of published work, and a search of data sets and technologies that could be used in a combined form. Second, based on this search and documentation, a general methodology was developed for using integrated spaceborne and ground-based data sets, intended as a guide for general scientists and policy-makers. Third, we found an existing project that was willing to be a pilot for testing the methodology: a U.S. EPANOAA project that was using aerial and ground-based sampling to learn more about the airborne sources of mercury deposition in the Florida Everglades. This document presents the results of the literature and project review, the complete methodology, and the outcome of the Florida Everglades pilot project.

Report↗
USGS2007

U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Resources Program - Science Supporting Mineral Resource Stewardship

The United States is the world's largest user of mineral resources. We use them to build our homes and cities, fertilize our food crops, and create wealth that allows us to buy goods and services. Individuals rarely use nonfuel mineral resources in their natural state - we buy light bulbs, not the silica, soda ash, lime, coal, salt, tungsten, copper, nickel, molybdenum, iron, manganese, aluminum, and zinc used to convert electricity into light. The USGS Mineral Resources Program (MRP) is the sole Federal source of scientific information and unbiased research on nonfuel mineral potential, production, and consumption, as well as on the environmental effects of minerals. The MRP also provides baseline geochemical, geophysical, and mineral-deposit data used to understand environmental issues related to extraction and use of mineral resources. Understanding how minerals, water, plants, and organisms interact contributes to our understanding of the environment, which is essential for maintaining human and ecosystem health. To support creation of economic and national security policies in a global context, MRP collects and analyzes data on essential mineral commodities from around the world.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS1981

Aeromagnetic map of the El Malpais Instant Study Area and adjacent areas, Valencia County, New Mexico

The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (Public Law 94-579, October 21, 1976), requires the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Bureau of Mines to conduct mineral surveys on certain areas to determine their mineral resource potential. Results must be made available to the public and be submitted to the President and the Congress. This report presents the results of a mineral survey of the El Malpais Instant Study Area and adjacent areas, Valencia County, New Mexico.

New Mexico↗
USGS1984

Aeromagnetic, Bouguer gravity, and interpretation maps of the Sheep Hole-Cadiz Wilderness Study Area (CDCA-305), San Bernardino County, California

The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (Public Law 94-579, October 21, 1976) requires the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Bureau of Mines to conduct mineral surveys on certain areas to determine their mineral resource potential. Results must be made available to the public and be submitted to the President and the Congress. These maps presents the results of a mineral survey of the Sheep Hole-Cadiz Wilderness Study Area (CDCA-305), California Desert Conservation Area, San Bernardino County, California. The U.S. Bureau of Mines conducted a mineral survey of the Sheep Hole-Cadiz Wilderness Study Area, which encompasses approximately 200,000 acres including enclosed private lands, in south-central San Bernardino County, California. The U.S. Bureau of Mines studied the mineral resources of mines, prospects, and mineralized areas; geologic, geochemical, and geophysical investigations were conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey. The study area is located in the Mojave Desert 13 miles east of Amboy, California, 20 miles east of Twentynine Palms, California, and 90 miles east of San Bernardino, and encompasses parts of the Dale Lake, Bristol Lake, Cadiz Valley and Cadiz Lake 15-minute quadrangles. Its borders are defined by the Amboy Road and a gas pipeline service road on the northwest, the unimproved Cadiz Valley access road on the east, State Route 62 along the south, and the Iron Age mine road and an unimproved powerline service road on the west. Major access from the east and west is provided by State Route 62 and access from the north is provided by the Amboy Road. Companion reports to this one describe the mineral resource potential (March and others, 1982), the geology (Howard and John, 1984), and hydrothermal alteration studies (Raines, 1983).

California↗
USGS1980

A summary of environmental geologic studies in the Georges Bank area, United States northeastern Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf, 1975-1977

The growing need for the United States to find and develop new energy resources has led to interest in the petroleum potential of frontier areas of the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) seaward of the eastern seaboard state boundaries. These submerged lands are under federal jurisdiction. The authority to lease tracts for resource development is vested with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), of the Department of Interior, pursuant to the terms of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act of 1953 and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969; the latter Act requires that the inevitable social and environmental effects of development be considered in leasing decisions. The Georges Bank region, part of the Continental Shelf off New England, is one of three designated Atlantic OCS target areas for petroleum exploration. It is also one of the world's most productive fishing grounds, and the nearby coastal states have high population densities, important fishing industries, and coastlines with extraordinary recreational and scenic value.

Georges Bank area↗
USGS1998

Proactive responses to human impacts that balance development and Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) conservation: An integrative model

Incorporating human impacts into conservation plans is critical to protect natural resources. Using a model that examines how anthropogenic changes might be proactively influenced to promote conservation, we argue that a denser human population does not spell inevitable doom for Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Humans affect the Atlantic salmon ecosystem deleteriously through landscape alteration, exploitation, external inputs, and resource competition. An intact ecosystem provides positive feedback to society by providing food, ecosystem services, and improving the quality of life. As Atlantic salmon and associated ecosystem benefits are increasingly valued by society, policies, laws, and regulations that protect salmon populations and habitats are codified into a 'control system' or institutional infrastructure. Via research that helps maintain wild salmon populations and in informing the public about the benefits of a healthy Atlantic salmon ecosystem, scientists can influence public attitudes and facilitate the implementation of environmental policies that moderate harmful anthropogenic changes. Because exchange among scientists is of paramount importance in increasing our understanding of important interrelationships between humans and fish, we recommend the establishment of an international salmon organizational for research.

Conference Paper↗
USGS1996

A watershed-scale approach to tracing metal contamination in the environment

Introduction Public policy during the 1800's encouraged mining in the western United States. Mining on Federal lands played an important role in the growing economy creating national wealth from our abundant and diverse mineral resource base. The common industrial practice from the early days of mining through about 1970 in the U.S. was for mine operators to dispose of the mine wastes and mill tailings in the nearest stream reach or lake. As a result of this contamination, many stream reaches below old mines, mills, and mining districts and some major rivers and lakes no longer support aquatic life. Riparian habitats within these affected watersheds have also been impacted. Often, the water from these affected stream reaches is generally not suitable for drinking, creating a public health hazard. The recent Department of Interior Abandoned Mine Lands ( AML ) Initiative is an effort on the part of the Federal Government to address the adverse environmental impact of these past mining practices on Federal lands. The AML Initiative has adopted a watershed approach to determine those sites that contribute the majority of the contaminants in the watershed. By remediating the largest sources of contamination within the watershed, the impact of metal contamination in the environment within the watershed as a whole is reduced rather than focusing largely on those sites for which principal responsible parties can be found. The scope of the problem of metal contamination in the environment from past mining practices in the coterminous U.S. is addressed in a recent report by Ferderer (1996). Using the USGS 1:2,000,000-scale hydrologic drainage basin boundaries and the USGS Minerals Availability System ( MAS ) data base, he plotted the distribution of 48,000 past-producing metal mines on maps showing the boundaries of lands administered by the various Federal Land Management Agencies ( FLMA ). Census analysis of these data provided an initial screening tool for prioritization of watersheds in the western U.S. A different approach to the scope of the abandoned mine problem (Church et al., 1996a) is shown by the water quality data collected by the States under the Clean Water Act, section 305(b). These data document the stream reaches affected by metals from naturally occurring sources as well as from mining, or mineral resource extraction. Permitted discharges from active industrial and mine sites are not covered in the 305(b) data base. Local citizens and state and federal agencies are all part of the collaborative decision process used to select the drainage basins chosen for the AML Initiative pilot studies. Data gathered by these three entities were brought to bear on the watershed selection process. The USGS prepared data available from Federal data bases in the form of interpretative GIS products. Maps of the states of Colorado (Plumlee et al., 1995) and a similar study of the state of Montana ( USGS , unpublished data) were used to select the Animas watershed in southwestern Colorado and the Boulder watershed southwest of Helena Montana as the pilot study areas for the AML Initiative. Thus, the watersheds selected for study were public decisions made on the basis of available scientific data. The role of the U.S. Geological Survey in the Abandoned Mine Land Initiative is outlined in Buxton et al. (1997). The watershed approach to metals contamination in the environment has been studied in several drainage basins (Church et al., 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996b; Kimball et al., 1995). The underlying principles used to successfully discriminate between sources and to quantify the impact of these sources on the environment are the subject of this report.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2026

Wind River subbasin restoration: Annual report of U.S. Geological Survey activities January 2024 through December 2024

We sampled juvenile wild Oncorhynchus mykiss (Steelhead Trout) in headwater streams of the Wind River, Washington, to characterize population attributes and investigate life-history metrics, particularly migratory patterns, and early life-stage survival. Additionally, this sampling provides an index of abundance of non-native Brook Trout Salvelinus confluentus . We used passive integrated transponder (PIT) tagging and a series of instream PIT-tag interrogation systems (PTISs) to track juveniles and adults. The Wind River subbasin is considered a wild Steelhead refuge by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). No hatchery Steelhead Trout have been released in the Wind River subbasin since 1997, and hatchery adults are estimated at less than one percent of spawners in most years. Over 25 years of Steelhead Trout status and trend monitoring and research in the subbasin is contributing to understanding of population response to numerous restoration actions in the subbasin, including removal of Hemlock Dam from Trout Creek in 2009, which had an inadequate adult ladder and contributed to increased water temperatures, to near lethal levels for salmonids. Data from our study, and companion work by WDFW, are contributing to the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (2009) Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation (RM&E) Strategy of Fish Population Status Monitoring. Specifically, this work addresses the sub-strategies of 1) Assessing the Status and Trends of Diversity of Natural Origin Fish Populations and Uncertainties Research regarding differing life histories of a wild Steelhead Trout population, 2) Assessing the Status and Trend of Adult Natural Origin Fish Populations, and 3) Monitoring and Evaluating the Effectiveness of Tributary Habitat Actions Relative to Environmental, Physical, or Biological Performance Objectives. During summer and fall 2024, we PIT-tagged 2,075 Steelhead Trout parr (age-0 and age-1), in the Trout Creek and upper Wind River watersheds. Age-0 and age-1 parr were at high abundance due to strong spawner numbers in 2023 and 2024 (Estimate of 932 in 2023; and a moderate number of spawners in 2024 though an estimate is not available at this time; 24-year median = 619; Charlie Cochran, WDFW Fish Biologist, personal commun., 2025). An additional 100 parr (age-0 and age-2 or older) were tagged to provide fish for estimating detection efficiencies at PTISs. Steelhead Trout parr were recaptured and detected through repeat headwater sampling, smolt trapping, instream PTISs and Columbia River mainstem PIT-tag detection. We maintained and upgraded six instream PTISs to detect PIT-tagged Steelhead Trout parr, smolts, and adults, providing data for population assessments, and life-cycle research. Detection data from PIT-tagged adult Steelhead Trout at our four primary PTISs allow assessment of adult escapement to tributary watersheds within the Wind River subbasin. Most adult Steelhead detected were tagged by WDFW at an adult trap in the lower Wind River and some as smolts at screw traps. Adult Steelhead Trout detection efficiency estimates at our primary PTIS in Trout Creek have been greater than 99 percent during eight of the past ten years and have exceeded 97% at our primary PTIS in the Wind River during nine of the past ten years. Adult escapement estimates to tributary watersheds are helping evaluate the efficacy of the 2009 removal of Hemlock Dam from rkm 2.0 of Trout Creek. Detections at the instream PTISs have shown trends of age-0 and age-1 Steelhead Trout parr emigration from natal areas during summer and fall, in addition to the expected movement of parr and smolts in spring. Our data suggest that most fish from a cohort that migrate downstream will do so at age-1 for additional rearing in the subbasin. We have estimated that from 15% to 56% of parr tagged as age-0 fish in headwater areas make downstream migrations at age-1 for additional rearing (median = 29%). We have estimated that from 1% to 27% of Steelhead Trout parr, tagged as age-1 fish, make downstream migrations during fall (median = 3.5%): this is especially pronounced in the upper Wind River portion of the watershed (median 10%). These findings raise questions about parr rearing habitat and whether migrations are density- or habitat-quality driven, and answers to such questions are long-term goals of this study as active and passive habitat restoration occurs. Repeat sampling at sites in the subbasin within and between years has enabled assessment of juvenile Steelhead Trout growth patterns. Growth rates (relative change in weight) of age-0 PIT-tagged parr during summer have been similar across the subbasin, though slightly lower in the Trout Creek watershed (Trout Creek sites, 0.57 - 1.25%/day, Wind River sites = 0.94 – 2.48%/day). Summer growth rates have been lower for age-1 parr in the Trout Creek watershed than the upper Wind River watershed (Trout Creek sites, = 0.03 - 0.14%/day, Wind River sites = 0.05 – 0.19%/day). Yearly relative growth was similar across the subbasin for both age-0 and age-1 tagged parr. During 2024 range of mean daily relative change in weight from the previous year for age-0 tagged fish was: Trout Creek sites = 0.96 – 1.41%/day, Wind River sites = 0.80 – 1.30 %/day; and for age1 tagged fish was: Trout Creek sites = 0.37 - 0.50 %/day, Wind River sites = no age-1 tagged recaptures. Non-native Brook Trout are present in the subbasin, chiefly the Trout Creek watershed. Mean percent-of-catch that is Brook Trout, at four sample sites in Trout Creek, has declined from the period 1998 – 2003 to the period 2011 – 2024 (range of decrease = 19 - 82%). Percent-of-catch (of 64 samples, 52 < 10%; 3 > 20%) and number of Brook Trout at the Trout Creek sites from 2011 through 2024, though variable, have generally declined. Habitat restoration evaluation efforts are critical to ensure efficient use of money and resources but require long-term monitoring of population metrics. Detailed viable salmonid population and life-history data, such as that provided by PIT-tagging and instream PTIS networks inform fisheries policy and management and enable assessment of long-term effects of habitat restoration actions such as the removal of Hemlock Dam on Trout Creek and proposed major instream habitat restoration in the upper Wind River.

Washington↗
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↗
USGS2013

Science-based management of public lands in southern Nevada

Landmark legislation provides guiding principles for land management planning in southern Nevada and the rest of the United States. Such legislation includes, but is not limited to, the Forest Service Organic Administration Act of 1897 (16 U.S>C. 473-478, 479-482 and 551), National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (U.S.C. Title 16, Secs. 1-4). Wilderness Act 1964 (P.L.88-577), National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (P.L. 91-190), Endangered Species Act of 1973 (P.L. 91-205), National Forest Management Act of of 1976 (P.L. 94-588), and Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (P.L. 94-579). The acts establishing congressionally designated areas within southern Nevada, such as Lake Mead National Recreation Area, Spring Mountains National Restoration Area, and Desert National Wildlife Refuge, also contain guidelines for the management of these lands. These documents variously require preservation of natural and cultural resource and wilderness character, protection of species, and prevention of undesirable environmental effects from land management actions. These requirements must be met while allowing for multiple "uses" of certain public lands (e.g. recreation, ranching, resources extraction, renewable energy development, etc.) to the degree that they do no threaten preservation, protection, and prevention goals,. many considerations some into play in the development and implementation for land management plans and actions. The planning process requires a balancing act that sometimes pit one need or priority against another. When priorities can trump other needs can prioritized and receive disproportionate consideration. Overall, the management of public lands is a very complicated and sometime contentious process. Science provides an objective way to help weigh quantifiable information and draw conclusions about the effects of past and potential future land management policies, decisions, and actions. When effectively integrated into adaptive management, science-based information can reduce uncertainties, increase knowledge, and improve decision making. However, the specific science information needed for effective management is often lacking or difficult to access or interpret. Science is typically reported in scientific journals as discrete units describing individual studies with other scientists as the primary audience. Translations of these studies an synthesis or multiple studies into formats that can be readily used in land management planning efforts are often lacking. Identifying and articulating the highest priority science and research needs is one of the primary purposes of the Southern Nevada Agency Partnership (SNAP; http://www.SNAP.gov) Science and Research Team (chapter 1; Turner and others 2009). The SNAP Science and Research Strategy (Strategy) calls for a synthesis report to be written every 5 years summarizing the state of knowledge, information gaps and management implications of scientific information as it relates to the SNAP Strategy goals (Turner and others 2009). This General Technical Report serves as the first SNAP Science and Research Synthesis Report (Synthesis Report) commissioned by the Science and Research Team. The Synthesis Report is mostly based on information form the peer-reviewed scientific literature, and is itself peer reviewed and constitutes a new contribution to the scientific literature. This final chapter addresses Sub-goal 2.3, which is to manage current and future authorized southern Nevada land uses in a manner that balances public need and ecosystem sustainability, and Sub-goal 2.5, which is to promote an effective conservation education and interpretation program to improve the quality of resources and enhance public use and enjoyment of southern Nevada public lands. It summarizes information form the previous chapters on what scientific information is known currently and what remains largely unknown, and it discusses how science can be used to make future management decisions that balances public needs and ecosystem sustainability.

Nevada↗
USGS2012

USGS Environmental health science strategy: providing environmental health science for a changing world: Public review release

America has an abundance of natural resources. We have bountiful clean water, fertile soil, and unrivaled national parks, wildlife refuges, and public lands. These resources enrich our lives and preserve our health and wellbeing. These resources have been maintained because of our history of respect for their value and an enduring commitment to their vigilant protection. Awareness of the social, economic, and personal value of the health of our environment is increasing. The emergence of environmentally driven diseases caused by environmental exposure to contaminants and pathogens is a growing concern worldwide. New health threats and patterns of established threats are affected by both natural and anthropogenic changes to the environment. Human activities are key drivers of emerging (new and re-emerging) health threats. Societal demands for land and natural resources, a better quality of life, improved economic prosperity, and the environmental impacts associated with these demands will continue to increase. Natural earth processes, climate trends, and related climatic events will add to the environmental impact of human activities. These environmental drivers will influence exposure to disease agents, including viral, bacterial, prion, and fungal pathogens, parasites, natural earth materials, toxins and other biogenic compounds, and synthetic chemicals and substances. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) defines environmental health science broadly as the interdisciplinary study of relations among the quality of the physical environment, the health of the living environment, and human health. The interactions among these three spheres are driven by human activities, ecological processes, and natural earth processes; the interactions affect exposure to contaminants and pathogens and the severity of environmentally driven diseases in animals and people. This definition provides USGS with a framework for synthesizing natural science information from across the Bureau and providing it to environmental, natural resource, agricultural, and public-health managers. The USGS is a Federal science agency with a broad range of natural science expertise relevant to environmental health. USGS provides scientific information and tools as a scientific basis for management and policy decision making. USGS specializes in science at the environment-health interface, by characterizing the processes that affect the interaction among the physical environment, the living environment, and people, and the resulting factors that affect ecological and human exposure to disease agents. This report describes a 10-year strategy that encompasses the portfolio of USGS environmental health science. It summarizes national environmental health priorities that USGS is best suited to address, and will serve as a strategic framework for USGS environmental health science goals, actions, and outcomes for the next decade. Implementation of this strategy is intended to aid coordination of USGS environmental health activities and to provide a focal point for disseminating information to stakeholders. The "One Health" paradigm advocated by the World Health Organization (WHO, 2011), and the American Veterinary Medicine Association (AVMA, 2008), among others, is based on a general recognition that the health of humans, animals, and the environment are inextricably linked. Thus, successful efforts to protect that health will require increased interdisciplinary research and increased communication and collaboration among the broader scientific and health community. This strategy is built upon that paradigm. The vision, mission, and five cornerstone goals of the USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy were developed with significant input from a wide range of stakeholders. Vision - The USGS is a premier source of the environmental health science needed to safeguard the health of the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. Mission - The mission of USGS in environmental health science is to contribute scientific information to environmental, natural resource, agricultural, and public-health managers, who use that science to support sound decision making. USGS provides the science to: - Goal 1: Identify, prioritize, and detect contaminants and pathogens of emerging environmental concern. - Goal 2: Reduce the impact of contaminants on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Goal 3: Reduce the impact of pathogens on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Goal 4: Discover the complex interactions and combined effects of exposure to contaminants and pathogens. - Goal 5: Prepare for and respond to environmental impacts and related health threats of natural and anthropogenic disasters. Goals 1 through 4 are intended to provide science to address environmental health threats in a logical order, from informing prevention and preparedness, to supporting systematic management response to environmental health issues. Goal 4 addresses the interaction among contaminants and pathogens, an issue of emerging concern in environmental health science. Goal 5 acknowledges the fact that natural and anthropogenic disasters can cause immediate and prolonged adverse environmental health threats. This strategy proposes that USGS take the following strategic science actions to achieve each of the five goals of this strategy: Goal 1: Identify, prioritize, and detect contaminants and pathogens of emerging environmental concern. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Prioritize contaminants and pathogens of emerging concern to guide research, detection, and management activities. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Conduct surveillance and monitoring to provide early warning of emerging health threats. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Develop approaches and tools that identify vulnerable environmental settings, ecosystems, and species. Goal 2: Reduce the impact of contaminants on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Systematically characterize the sources, occurrence, transport and fate of environmental contaminants to guide efforts to manage and mitigate contamination. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Evaluate the threats of contamination on the health of the environment, fish, wildlife, and people, and inform the associated management and protection efforts. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Characterize potential human exposure to support establishment of health-based standards or guidelines and contamination-reduction efforts. Goal 3: Reduce the impact of pathogens on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Determine the biotic and abiotic factors that control the ecology of infectious diseases affecting natural populations of aquatic and terrestrial species and potential transmission to other animals and humans. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Establish how natural and anthropogenic environmental changes affect the distribution and severity of infectious diseases in natural populations of aquatic and terrestrial species and potential transmission to other animals and humans. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Develop surveillance systems to identify changing patterns of disease activity in priority geographic areas. Goal 4: Discover the complex interactions and combined effects of exposure to contaminants and pathogens. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Identify how exposure to one class of disease agents (contaminants or pathogens) can make an organism more susceptible to effects from exposure to the other class of disease agents. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Implement interdisciplinary studies that characterize the effects of combined exposure to pathogens and contaminants. Goal 5: Prepare for and respond to the environmental impacts and related health threats of natural and anthropogenic disasters. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Establish a formal interdisciplinary science capability to rapidly assess the environmental health risks associated with disasters. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Enhance methods to anticipate, prepare for, and identify environmental, ecological, and related health impacts of future disasters. This strategy is one of seven USGS science strategies developed concurrently: - Climate and Land Use Change - Core Science Systems - Ecosystems - Energy and Mineral Resources - Environmental Health - Natural Hazards - Water. This strategy describes how USGS will address the highest priority environmental health issues facing the Nation. The ultimate intended outcome of this science strategy is prevention and reduction of adverse impacts to the quality of the environment, the health of our living resources, and human health. Communication with, and receiving input from, partners and stakeholders regarding their science needs is essential for successful implementation of this strategy. It is incumbent on USGS to reach out to all stakeholders to ensure that USGS efforts are focused on the highest priority environmental health issues and that products are provided in the most timely and usable form to all those who can use them. USGS must reach out to the scientific community, internally and externally, to ensure that our efforts are integrated with and take full advantage of the activities of others.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1996

A guide to safe field operations

Most functions of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Water Resources Division (WRD) require employees to participate in numerous field activities ranging from routine meetings with cooperators, other federal and public officials, and private citizens to potentially hazardous assignments, such as making flood measurements and scuba diving to service underwater instruments. It is paramount that each employee be aware of safety procedures and operational policies of the WRD to ensure that (1) their activities avoid or minimize personal injury to the employee, coworkers, or anyone in the vicinity of the field activity, and (2) their conduct does not infringe on the personal or property rights of any individual or organization. The purpose of the guide is to familiarize employees with the operational and safety procedures expected to be followed by each employee as a representative of the WRD. It is also intended as a training tool for all new employees and a document to be reviewed by each employee before undertaking a field assignment. It includes general procedures that are standard and applicable to all field operations, such as communication, vehicle operation, and adequate preparation for anticipated weather conditions. It also includes a discussion of specific procedures and safety considerations for most of the routine field assignments undertaken by hydrologists and hydrologic technicians of the WRD. The guide is not intended to be a technical handbook outlining step-by-step procedures for performing specific tasks or a comprehensive discussion of every possible activity that may be undertaken by a USGS employee. Employees are referred to the Techniques for Water-Resources Investigations (TWRI) series for specific technical procedures and to the U.S. Geological Survey Safety and Environmental Health Handbook 445-1-H (USGS, August 1989), USGS Occupational Hazards and Safety Procedures Handbook 445-2-H (December 1993), the WRD notebook on Safety Policy and Guidance Memoranda, and other references for procedures and safety issues related to nonroutine activities, such as operations on large vessels and aircraft.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2009

The spatial and temporal variability of groundwater recharge in a forested basin in northern Wisconsin

Recharge varies spatially and temporally as it depends on a wide variety of factors (e.g. vegetation, precipitation, climate, topography, geology, and soil type), making it one of the most difficult, complex, and uncertain hydrologic parameters to quantify. Despite its inherent variability, groundwater modellers, planners, and policy makers often ignore recharge variability and assume a single average recharge value for an entire watershed. Relatively few attempts have been made to quantify or incorporate spatial and temporal recharge variability into water resource planning or groundwater modelling efforts. In this study, a simple, daily soil-water balance model was developed and used to estimate the spatial and temporal distribution of groundwater recharge of the Trout Lake basin of northern Wisconsin for 1996-2000 as a means to quantify recharge variability. For the 5 years of study, annual recharge varied spatially by as much as 18 cm across the basin; vegetation was the predominant control on this variability. Recharge also varied temporally with a threefold annual difference over the 5-year period. Intra-annually, recharge was limited to a few isolated events each year and exhibited a distinct seasonal pattern. The results suggest that ignoring recharge variability may not only be inappropriate, but also, depending on the application, may invalidate model results and predictions for regional and local water budget calculations, water resource management, nutrient cycling, and contaminant transport studies. Recharge is spatially and temporally variable, and should be modelled as such. Copyright ?? 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Hydrological Processes↗
USGS2016

The challenges and opportunities in cumulative effects assessment

The cumulative effects of increasing human use of the ocean and coastal zone have contributed to a rapid decline in ocean and coastal resources. As a result, scientists are investigating how multiple, overlapping stressors accumulate in the environment and impact ecosystems. These investigations are the foundation for the development of new tools that account for and predict cumulative effects in order to more adequately prevent or mitigate negative effects. Despite scientific advances, legal requirements, and management guidance, those who conduct assessments—including resource managers, agency staff, and consultants—continue to struggle to thoroughly evaluate cumulative effects, particularly as part of the environmental assessment process. Even though 45 years have passed since the United States National Environmental Policy Act was enacted, which set a precedent for environmental assessment around the world, defining impacts, baseline, scale, and significance are still major challenges associated with assessing cumulative effects. In addition, we know little about how practitioners tackle these challenges or how assessment aligns with current scientific recommendations. To shed more light on these challenges and gaps, we undertook a comparative study on how cumulative effects assessment (CEA) is conducted by practitioners operating under some of the most well-developed environmental laws around the globe: California, USA; British Columbia, Canada; Queensland, Australia; and New Zealand. We found that practitioners used a broad and varied definition of impact for CEA, which led to differences in how baseline, scale, and significance were determined. We also found that practice and science are not closely aligned and, as such, we highlight opportunities for managers, policy makers, practitioners, and scientists to improve environmental assessment.

Environmental Impact Assessment Review↗
USGS2001

Interoperability and information discovery

In the context of information systems, there is interoperability when the distinctions between separate information systems are not a barrier to accomplishing a task that spans those systems. Interoperability so defined implies that there are commonalities among the systems involved and that one can exploit such commonalities to achieve interoperability. The challenge of a particular interoperability task is to identify relevant commonalities among the systems involved and to devise mechanisms that exploit those commonalities. The present paper focuses on the particular interoperability task of information discovery. The Global Information Locator Service (GILS) is described as a policy, standards, and technology framework for addressing interoperable information discovery on a global and long‐term basis. While there are many mechanisms for people to discover and use all manner of data and information resources, GILS initiatives exploit certain key commonalities that seem to be sufficient to realize useful information discovery interoperability at a global, long‐term scale. This paper describes ten of the specific commonalities that are key to GILS initiatives. It presents some of the practical implications for organizations in various roles: content provider, system engineer, intermediary, and searcher. The paper also provides examples of interoperable information discovery as deployed using GILS in four types of information communities: bibliographic, geographic, environmental, and government.

New Review of Information Networking↗