USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Natural Resources 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 613 records · Page 34Linked to original sources
USGS2013

Sedimentation in mountain streams: A review of methods of measurement

The goal of this review paper is to provide a list of methods and devices used to measure sediment accumulation in wadeable streams dominated by cobble and gravel substrate. Quantitative measures of stream sedimentation are useful to monitor and study anthropogenic impacts on stream biota, and stream sedimentation is measurable with multiple sampling methods. Evaluation of sedimentation can be made by measuring the concentration of suspended sediment, or turbidity, and by determining the amount of deposited sediment, or sedimentation on the streambed. Measurements of deposited sediments are more time consuming and labor intensive than measurements of suspended sediments. Traditional techniques for characterizing sediment composition in streams include core sampling, the shovel method, visual estimation along transects, and sediment traps. This paper provides a comprehensive review of methodology, devices that can be used, and techniques for processing and analyzing samples collected to aid researchers in choosing study design and equipment.

Natural Resources↗
USGS1993

The Pajarito Plateau: A bibliography

This bibliography is the result of two initially independent projects. As the consulting archaeologist at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Charlie R. Steen collected entries at the suggestion of the staff of the Environmental Surveillance Group of the Health, Safety, and Environmental Division, HSE-8. The primary purpose was to aid the staff in evaluating cultural resources on LANL lands. In addition to works that related to the archaeology and history of the area, Steen included notations of a few books and articles in other fields such as geology and natural history. It was hoped that they also would be of value to other organizations and to students of past human activities on the Pajarito Plateau. At the same time, the National Park Service (NPS) was planning a major survey of Bandelier National Monument (BNM). As part of this plan, the author was asked to prepare a background document that described research previously carried out in the area, including an annotated bibliography. Although the survey would be limited to the park boundaries, the larger Pajarito Plateau is a more logical study area from physiographic, environmental, and cultural perspectives; hence the focus was on this larger region. Mathien (1986) also included some references to natural resources studies, particularly those initiated by NPS within Bandelier National Monument. Both bibliographies were made available to Colleen Olinger and Beverly Larson of the Health and Environmental Services Group at Los Alamos. They realized that while neither was complete, each included entries missing from the other. Larson suggested the two bibliographies be combined. (At this time, Craig Allen was studying the landscape of the Jemez Mountains [Allen 1984c, 1989]. His investigations included much detailed information on natural resource studies and were added in 1991 and 1992.) To limit the scope of their work, Steen and Mathien had chosen their parameter: the Pajarito Plateau. Geographically, the Pajarito Plateau is described as the high tableland that lies between the Jemez Mountains on the west and the Rio Grande on the east. From north to south, it extends from the Chama Valley to La Cañada de Cochiti (Hewett 1906:14)(Figure 1). Because human activity rarely stops at such definite boundaries, major ethnographic studies of Tewa (San Ildefonso and Santa Clara) and Keres (Cochiti) linguistic groups are included. (Even though most of the historic pueblos occupied by the Tewa and Keres are not located on the Pajarito Plateau, oral traditions and archaeological data suggest that these groups once occupied sites on the plateau.) Towa studies are not included because Steen believed Towa ancestors were not involved in major cultural developments of the Pajarito Plateau. In addition, a bibliography of the Jemez area (home of Towa people) has been prepared by Michael Elliott (1982) and included with his nomination of large Pueblo sites near Jemez Springs to the National Register of Historic Places that is on file at the Museum of New Mexico, Laboratory of Anthropology, in Santa Fe. Both Steen and Mathien included references to geographically and historically related material that does not focus on the Pajarito Plateau but, nonetheless, is important to understanding the area's archaeology and physical environment, for example, lithic resources available from Cerro Pedernal or in the Sangre de Cristo Mountains.

New Mexico↗
USGS2018

Low survey response! Can I still use the data?

Natural resource agencies often use mail surveys to collect stakeholder information. However, a major concern of mail surveys have long been relatively low response rates compared to telephone or face-to-face interviews. Survey research has largely focused on achieving high response rates; however, in some situations even well designed surveys can have low response rates. We present an example of a 3-page (25 questions) survey measuring opinions and attitudes about native fish management in the South Dakota Black Hills region that received a relatively low response rate (21%) using a mailing, postcard, and second mailing of the questionnaire. We compare response rate and data quality of a third mailing of the full questionnaire with a one-page (5 questions) questionnaire measuring key variables to evaluate possible nonresponse bias. Within the total survey error (TSE) paradigm we provide evidence that reliable and useful information was collected by this survey.

South Dakota↗
USGS2011

Delivering climate science for the nation's fish, wildlife, and ecosystems: The U.S. Geological Survey National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center

Changes to the Earth's climate-temperature, precipitation, and other important aspects of climate-pose significant challenges to our Nation's natural resources now and will continue to do so. Managers of land, water, and living resources need to understand the impacts of climate change-which will exacerbate ongoing stresses such as habitat fragmentation and invasive species-so they can design effective response strategies. In 2008 Congress created the National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center (NCCWSC) within the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS); this center was formed to address challenges resulting from climate change and to empower natural resource managers with rigorous scientific information and effective tools for decision-making. Located at the USGS National Headquarters in Reston, Virginia, the NCCWSC has invested over $20M in cutting-edge climate change research and is now leading the effort to establish eight regional Department of the Interior (DOI) Climate Science Centers (CSCs).

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2000

Analytical group decision making in natural resources: Methodology and application

Group decision making is becoming increasingly important in natural resource management and associated scientific applications, because multiple values are treated coincidentally in time and space, multiple resource specialists are needed, and multiple stakeholders must be included in the decision process. Decades of social science research on decision making in groups have provided insights into the impediments to effective group processes and on techniques that can be applied in a group context. Nevertheless, little integration and few applications of these results have occurred in resource management decision processes, where formal groups are integral, either directly or indirectly. A group decision-making methodology is introduced as an effective approach for temporary, formal groups (e.g., workshops). It combines the following three components: (1) brainstorming to generate ideas; (2) the analytic hierarchy process to produce judgments, manage conflict, enable consensus, and plan for implementation; and (3) a discussion template (straw document). Resulting numerical assessments of alternative decision priorities can be analyzed statistically to indicate where group member agreement occurs and where priority values are significantly different. An application of this group process to fire research program development in a workshop setting indicates that the process helps focus group deliberations; mitigates groupthink, nondecision, and social loafing pitfalls; encourages individual interaction; identifies irrational judgments; and provides a large amount of useful quantitative information about group preferences. This approach can help facilitate scientific assessments and other decision-making processes in resource management.

Forest Science↗
USGS2000

Early avian research at the Savannah River Site, South Carolina: historical highlights and possibilities for the future

Avian biology and collection of baseline population data was a major part of the first decade (1951-1961) of field research at the Savannah River Site (SRS). Baseline inventories involving organisms and land-use types were part of the mission in the early contracts between the Atomic Energy Commission (now the Department of Energy) and the University of Georgia prior to the establishment of the Savannah River Ecology Laboratory (SREL) as a National Environmental Research Park Laboratory. About 27% of the SREL publications during this first decade dealt with birds. Since that time, research on the SRS landscape has expanded and broadened with less than 10% of the publications dealing with birds. SRS changed also from an agriculturally dominated area with ca. 40% open areas (fields, crops, pastures) to a timber-managed area with ca. 80% forests, 12% open areas, and 2% open water impoundments. Baseline breeding bird populations of the SRS in the 1950s were typical for the region with avian species richness and density increasing with the age and succession of the vegetation (0-26 species and densities of 0-741 pairs/km2 for the habitats surveyed). During the first decade at the SRS, the resident game bird population of Northern Bobwhites (Colinus virginianus) increased and the Mourning Dove (Zenaida rnacroura) population, a migratory upland game bird, remained stable. Current avian research efforts, as well as new opportunities to reexamine the breeding bird populations and the landscape of SRS, will provide a better understanding of the potential causes of declines of neotropical migratory birds, declines of resident and migratory game birds, and how habitat influences invasions and extinctions of breeding birds in the region. Emphasis for future research and monitoring should be on neotropical migratory bird populations in decline (Yellow-billed Cuckoo, Coccyzus americanus; Eastern Wood-Pewee, Contopus virens; Wood Thrush, Hylocichla mustelina; Prairie Warbler, Dendroica discolor; and Painted Bunting, Passerina ciris), resident species in decline (e.g., Loggerhead Shrike, Lanius ludovicianus), certain species groups (e.g., waterfowl and wading birds), important habitat, and recent invasions and extinctions of breeding species. Old growth forested wetlands should be monitored because of the large number of neotropical migratory birds that depend on this habitat in the southeastern United States. A variety of survey techniques will be needed to determine population trends: line transects, call or song playbacks, roadside point surveys (call counts for game birds), aerial surveys, and presence or absence of species within stratified areas of SRS. The SRS provides opportunity for avian research at the landscape level with the potential to solve problems important to the survival of many bird populations as well as to increase our knowledge on how to manage and conserve our avian natural resources for the future.

Book chapter↗
USGS2012

The U.S. Geological Survey Ecosystem Science Strategy, 2012-2022 - Advancing discovery and application through collaboration

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 policy-makers are faced with countless decisions each year at local, state, tribal, territorial, and national levels on issues as diverse as renewable and non-renewable energy development, agriculture, forestry, water supply, and resource allocations at the urban-rural interface. The urgency for sound decision-making 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 well-being 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 decision-makers 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 USGS scientists and partners can play in building scientific understanding and providing timely information to decision-makers. The strategy underscores the connection between scientific discoveries and the application of new knowledge. The strategy integrates ecosystem science and decision-making, producing new scientific outcomes to assist resource managers and providing public benefits. The USGS is uniquely positioned to play an important role in ecosystem science. With its wide range of expertise, the agency 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 DOI and other partners in the natural sciences, in both conducting science and its application. 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 and vision for USGS ecosystems science that focuses on five long-term goals, which are seen as interconnected and reinforcing components: • 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 decision-making 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 decision-making. Use quantitative approaches to assess the vulnerabilities of ecosystems, habitats, and species, and evaluate strategies for adaptation, restoration, and sustainable management. Following the strategic approaches are a set of proposed actions that represent a sampling of specific 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 both 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 over the next decade in advancing the scientific foundation for sustaining the natural resources that diverse, productive, resilient ecosystems provide.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2012

Strategic directions for U.S. Geological Survey water science, 2012-2022 - Observing, understanding, predicting, and delivering water science to the Nation

Executive Summary This report expands the Water Science Strategy that was begun in the USGS Science Strategy, “Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017” (U.S. Geological Survey, 2007). The report looks at the relevant issues facing society and develops a strategy built around observing, understanding, predicting, and delivering water science for the next 5 to 10 years by building new capabilities, tools, and delivery systems to meet the Nation’s water-resource needs. This report begins by presenting the vision of water science for the USGS and the societal issues that are influenced by, and in turn influence, the water resources of our Nation. The essence of the Water Strategic Science Plan is built on the concept of “water availability,” defined as spatial and temporal distribution of water quantity and quality, as related to human and ecosystem needs, as affected by human and natural influences . The report also describes the core capabilities of the USGS in water science—the strengths, partnerships, and science integrity that the USGS has built over its 130-year history. Nine priority actions are presented in the report, which combine and elevate the numerous specific strategic actions listed throughout the report. Priority actions were developed as a means of providing the audience of this report with a list for focused attention, even if resources and time limit the ability of managers to address all of the strategic actions in the report. Priority actions focus on the following: Improve integrated science planning for water. Expand and enhance water-resource monitoring networks. Characterize the water cycle through development of state-of-the-art 3-D/4-D hydrogeologic framework models at multiple scales. Clarify the linkage between human water use (engineered hydrology) and the water cycle (natural hydrology). Advance ecological flow science. Provide flood-inundation science and information. Develop rapid deployment teams for water-related emergencies. Conduct integrated watershed assessment, research, and modeling. Deliver water data and analyses to the Nation. The body of the report is presented as a hierarchal set of 5 goals, 14 objectives, and 27 strategic actions that the USGS should undertake to advance water science through year 2022. The goals deal with: Providing society the information it needs regarding the amount and quality of water in all components of the water cycle at high temporal and spatial resolution, nationwide; Advancing our understanding of processes that determine water availability; Predicting changes in the quantity and quality of water resources in response to changing climate, population, land use, and management scenarios; Anticipating and responding to water-related emergencies and conflicts; and Delivering timely hydrologic data, analyses, and decision-support tools seamlessly across the Nation to support water-resource decisions. Scientific information produced on water resources would be without value if it were not communicated to society in a fashion that can inform decisions and actions. Therefore, the chapter following the goals describes how the USGS should inform, involve, and educate society about the science it produces. This includes discussions on local outreach and the use of social media for effective communication. This report concludes with a chapter devoted to the crosscutting science issues of the Water Mission Area with the other USGS Mission Areas: Climate and Land Use Change, Core Science Systems, Ecosystems, Energy and Minerals, Environmental Health Science, and Natural Hazards. Not one of these Mission Areas stands alone—all must work together and integrate their actions to fulfill the USGS science mission for the future. This final chapter identifies the important linkages that must be realized and maintained for this integration to occur.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2015

Multiscale geophysical imaging of the critical zone

Details of Earth's shallow subsurface—a key component of the critical zone (CZ)—are largely obscured because making direct observations with sufficient density to capture natural characteristic spatial variability in physical properties is difficult. Yet this inaccessible region of the CZ is fundamental to processes that support ecosystems, society, and the environment. Geophysical methods provide a means for remotely examining CZ form and function over length scales that span centimeters to kilometers. Here we present a review highlighting the application of geophysical methods to CZ science research questions. In particular, we consider the application of geophysical methods to map the geometry of structural features such as regolith thickness, lithological boundaries, permafrost extent, snow thickness, or shallow root zones. Combined with knowledge of structure, we discuss how geophysical observations are used to understand CZ processes. Fluxes between snow, surface water, and groundwater affect weathering, groundwater resources, and chemical and nutrient exports to rivers. The exchange of gas between soil and the atmosphere have been studied using geophysical methods in wetland areas. Indirect geophysical methods are a natural and necessary complement to direct observations obtained by drilling or field mapping. Direct measurements should be used to calibrate geophysical estimates, which can then be used to extrapolate interpretations over larger areas or to monitor changing processes over time. Advances in geophysical instrumentation and computational approaches for integrating different types of data have great potential to fill gaps in our understanding of the shallow subsurface portion of the CZ and should be integrated where possible in future CZ research.

Reviews of Geophysics↗
USGS2013

A natural resource condition assessment for Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks: Appendix 14: plants of conservation concern

Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks are located in the California Floristic Province, which has been named one of world‘s hotspots of endemic biodiversity (Myers et al. 2000). The California Floristic Province is the largest and most important geographic floristic unit in California and extends from the Klamath Mountains of southwestern Oregon to the northwestern portion of Baja California (Hickman 1993). The Sierra Nevada, one of six regions that make up the California Floristic Province, covers nearly 20% of the land in California yet contains over 50% of its flora. Within the Sierra Nevada, the southern Sierra supports more Sierran endemic and rare plant taxa than the central and northern portions of the region (Shevock 1996). Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks (SEKI) encompass roughly 20% of the southern Sierra Nevada region. The parks overlap three floristic subregions (central Sierra Nevada High, southern Sierra Nevada High, and southern Sierra Nevada Foothills), and border the Great Basin Floristic Province. The parks support a rich and diverse vascular flora composed of over 1,560 taxa. Of these, 150 taxa are identified as having special status. The term special status is applied here to include taxa that are state or federally listed, rare in California, or at risk because they have a limited distribution. Only one species from these parks is listed under the state or federal Endangered Species Acts ( Carex tompkinsii , Tompkins‘ sedge, is listed as a rare species under the California Endangered Species Act), and one species is under review for federal endangered listing ( Pinus albicaulis , whitebark pine). However, an absence of threatened and endangered species recognized by Endangered Species Acts is not equivalent to an absence of species at risk. There are 83 plant taxa documented as occurring in SEKI that are considered imperiled or vulnerable in the state by the California Department of Fish and Game‘s California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB 2010a). There are an additional 66 taxa not formally listed by CNDDB that are recognized as having special status because their distribution is restricted to the Sierra Nevada. Special status plants are distributed throughout the two parks and inhabit a wide range of environments along the length of the elevation gradient that characterizes these parks. Ideally, we would assess the condition (status and trends) of each of the taxa on the SEKI special status plant list, documenting current population sizes, demographic rates and demographic trends. We would also hope to quantify the effects of individual stressors on each species based on existing monitoring and research. However, no data are available for most of the species on the special status plant list. For those few species (12 herbaceous species and two tree species) for which we possess some change over time information, the data are not adequate to make a competent assessment. Note that we have not explored the tree demographic information in any detail, as is covered in the NRCA Intact Forest/Five Needle Pines and Sequoia chapters. In general, we are unable to present an ‗integrity‘ metric for special status species in the parks, since the data to quantify the condition of each species in such a manner is not available. In contrast, the park does possess substantial data describing biodiversity in the parks. Therefore, our analysis focuses on describing the distribution and rarity of special status plants within the parks, with a particular focus on assessing the spatial distribution of species richness. We hope that such information will prove useful to park managers in determining which areas in the parks merit the most attention (for example in developing monitoring protocols). We also assess potential vulnerability of special status species to the stressors chosen by the NRCA working group, using both park data and available literature. As a first step, we spent considerable effort updating and refining the criteria for the special status plant list, as this list defines which taxa are considered in our assessment. Observation data of these species was then compiled from all known sources in order to provide a comprehensive view of where special status plants have been documented and, ultimately, to enable the most informed determinations of areas in the parks that potentially support the highest number of rare and endemic taxa. These ‗hot spot‘ analyses are presented by geographic region, vegetation type and elevation. For these and other analyses presented in this report, we place more focus on summarizing findings for the herbaceous and shrub special status taxa than on special status trees. The trees which qualify as special status are the focus of other NRCA chapters, including Giant Sequoia and Intact Forests/Five-needle Pines. We do, however, present their mapped distributions and provide overviews of research related to the special status tree taxa in the Stressors section of this report.

California↗
USGS2000

Louisiana coastal ecosystem

Louisiana's coast and its degradation and restoration are major environmental issues being studied at the National Wetlands Research Center. Coastal ecosystems are vulnerable because of the tremendous amount of human activity that takes place along the coast. Information on ecological processes is essential to guide the development along the coast as well as to protect and restore wildlife habitat. Louisiana has about 40% of coastal wetlands in the lower 48 states; they support fish, waterfowl, and fur-bearing animals as well as unique cultures like that of the Acadians. The fish and wildlife resources of Louisiana's coast produce over $1 billion each year in revenues. But Louisiana has the highest coastal loss rate because of natural and human causes. Over the past three decades, Louisiana has lost as much as 35-40 mi 2 (90-104 km 2 ) of coastal wetlands a year. The National Wetlands Research Center is qualified to assess and monitor this ecosystem because of its proximity to the study area, a staff chosen for their expertise in the system, and a number of established partnerships with others who study the areas. The Center is often the lead group in partnerships with universities, other federal agencies, and private entities who study this ecosystem. Most of the Center's research and technology development performed for coastal wetlands are done at the Lafayette headquarters; some work is performed at the National Wetlands Research Center's project office in Baton Rouge, LA.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2021

Snowpack signals in North American tree rings

Climate change has contributed to recent declines in mountain snowpack and earlier runoff, which in turn has intensified hydrological droughts in western North America. Climate model projections suggest that continued and severe snowpack reductions are expected over the 21st century, with profound consequences for ecosystems and human welfare. Yet the current understanding of trends and variability in mountain snowpack is limited by the relatively short and strongly temperature forced observational record. Motivated by the urgent need to better understand snowpack dynamics in a long-term, spatially coherent framework, here we examine snow-growth relationships in western North American tree-ring chronologies. We present an extensive network of snow-sensitive proxy data to support high space/time resolution paleosnow reconstruction, quantify and interpret the type and spatial density of snow related signals in tree-ring records, and examine the potential for regional bias in the tree-ring based reconstruction of different snow drought types (dry versus warm). Our results indicate three distinct snow-growth relationships in tree-ring chronologies: moisture-limited snow proxies that include a spring temperature signal, moisture-limited snow proxies lacking a spring temperature signal, and energy-limited snow proxies. Each proxy type is based on distinct physiological tree-growth mechanisms related to topographic and climatic site conditions, and provides unique information on mountain snowpack dynamics that can be capitalized upon within a statistical reconstruction framework. This work provides a platform and foundational background required for the accelerated production of high-quality annually-resolved snowpack reconstructions from regional to high (<12 km) spatial scales in western North America, and by extension, will support an improved understanding of the vulnerability of snowmelt-derived water resources to natural variability and future climate warming.

Environmental Research Letters↗
USGS2011

Permafrost-associated natural gas hydrate occurrences on the Alaska North Slope

In the 1960s Russian scientists made what was then a bold assertion that gas hydrates should occur in abundance in nature. Since this early start, the scientific foundation has been built for the realization that gas hydrates are a global phenomenon, occurring in permafrost regions of the arctic and in deep water portions of most continental margins worldwide. In 1995, the U.S. Geological Survey made the first systematic assessment of the in-place natural gas hydrate resources of the United States. That study suggested that the amount of gas in the gas hydrate accumulations of northern Alaska probably exceeds the volume of known conventional gas resources on the North Slope. Researchers have long speculated that gas hydrates could eventually become a producible energy resource, yet technical and economic hurdles have historically made gas hydrate development a distant goal. This view began to change in recent years with the realization that this unconventional resource could be developed with existing conventional oil and gas production technology. One of the most significant developments was the completion of the BPXA-DOE-USGS Mount Elbert Gas Hydrate Stratigraphic Test Well on the Alaska North Slope, which along with the Mallik project in Canada, have for the first time allowed the rational assessment of gas hydrate production technology and concepts. Almost 40 years of gas hydrate research in northern Alaska has confirmed the occurrence of at least two large gas hydrate accumulations on the North Slope. We have also seen in Alaska the first ever assessment of how much gas could be technically recovered from gas hydrates. However, significant technical concerns need to be further resolved in order to assess the ultimate impact of gas hydrate energy resource development in northern Alaska.

Alaska↗
USGS2010

Large-scale natural gradient tracer test in sand and gravel, Cape Cod, Massachusetts: 3. Hydraulic conductivity variability and calculated macrodispersivities

Hydraulic conductivity ( K ) variability in a sand and gravel aquifer on Cape Cod, Massachusetts, was measured and subsequently used in stochastic transport theories to estimate macrodispersivities. Nearly 1500 K measurements were obtained by borehole flowmeter tests and permeameter analyses of cores. The geometric mean for the flowmeter tests (0.11 cm/s) is similar to that estimated from other field tests. The mean for the permeameter tests (0.035 cm/s) is significantly lower, possibly because of compaction of the cores. The variance for the flowmeter (0.24) is also greater than that for the permeameter (0.14). Geostatistical analyses applying negative exponential models with and without nuggets reveal similar spatial correlation structures for the two data sets. Estimated correlation scales range from 2.9 to 8 m in the horizontal and from 0.18 to 0.38 m in the vertical. Estimates of asymptotic longitudinal dispersivity (b.35–0.78 m) are similar in magnitude to that observed in the natural gradient tracer test (0.96 m) previously conducted at this site.

Massachusetts↗
USGS2016

Migratory bird habitat in relation to tile drainage and poorly drained hydrologic soil groups

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) is home to more than 50% of the migratory waterfowl in North America. Although the PPR provides an abundance of temporary and permanent wetlands for nesting and feeding, increases in commodity prices and agricultural drainage practices have led to a trend of wetland drainage. The Northern Shoveler is a migratory dabbling duck species that uses wetland habitats and cultivated croplands in the PPR. Richland County in North Dakota and Roberts County in South Dakota have an abundance of wetlands and croplands and were chosen as the study areas for this research to assess the wetland size and cultivated cropland in relation to hydrologic soil groups for the Northern Shoveler habitat. This study used geographic information system data to analyze Northern Shoveler habitats in association with Natural Resource Conservation Service soil data. Habitats, which are spatially associated with certain hydrologic soil groups, may be at risk of artificial drainage installations because of their proximity to cultivated croplands and soil lacking in natural drainage that may become wet or inundated. Findings indicate that most wetlands that are part of Northern Shoveler habitats were within or adjacent to cultivated croplands. The results also revealed soil hydrologic groups with high runoff potential and low water transmission rates account for most of the soil within the Northern Shoveler‘s wetland and cropland habitats. Habitats near agriculture with high runoff potential are likely to be drained and this has the potential of reducing Northern Shoveler habitat.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2025

Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program—2023 Year-in-Review

Introduction Established in 1935, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program is a unique cooperative partnership among State fish and wildlife agencies, host universities, the Wildlife Management Institute, USGS, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Designed to meet the scientific needs of natural resource management agencies and to produce trained wildlife management professionals, the program has grown from the original nine wildlife-only Units to a program that, as of 2024, includes 43 Units located on university campuses in 41 States.

Circular↗
USGS2004

Mute swans and their Chesapeake Bay habitats: proceedings of a symposium

The symposium 'Mute Swans and their Chesapeake Bay Habitats,' held on June 7, 2001, provided a forum for biologists and managers to share research findings and management ideas concerning the exotic and invasive mute swan (Cygnus olar). This species has been increasing in population size and is considered by many to be a problem in regard to natural food resources in the Bay that are used by native waterfowl during the winter months. Other persons, however, feel that resource managers are attempting to create a problem to justify more killing of waterfowl by hunters. Some persons also believe that managers should focus on the larger issues causing the decline of native food resources, such as the unabated human population increase in the Bay watershed and in the immediate coastal areas of the Bay. The symposium, sponsored by the Wildfowl Trust of North America and the U.S. Geological Survey, provided the atmosphere for presentation of mute swan data and opinions in a collegial setting where discussion was welcomed and was often informative and enthusiastic. An interesting historic review of the swan in regard to the history of mankind was presented, followed by a discussion on the positive and negative effects of invasive species. Biologists from different parts of the continent discussed the population status of the species in several states in the east and in the Great Lakes area. Data on the food habits of this species were presented in regard to submerged aquatic vegetation, and an interesting discussion on the role that the food habits of Canada geese in regard to native vegetation was presented. Findings and recommendations of the Mute Swan Task Force were presented. Finally, a representative of the Friends of Animals gave a thought-provoking presentation in defense of the mute swan. The presentations, in general, provided the necessary information and recommendations to allow managers to proceed with management of this controversial species with new and valuable perspectives.

Maryland, Virginia↗
USGS1998

Recreation ecology research findings: Implications for wilderness and park managers

Recreationists unintentionally trample vegetation, erode soil, and disturb wildlife. Such human-related impacts present a dilemma for managers charged with the dual objectives of providing recreational opportunities and preserving natural environments. This paper presents some of the principal findings and management implications from research on visitor impacts to protected areas, termed recreation ecology research. This field of study seeks to identify the type and extent of resource impacts and to evaluate relationships between use-related, environmental, and managerial factors. The capabilities and managerial utility of recreation impact monitoring are also described.

Book chapter↗