USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Science Report”

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 685 records · Page 38Linked to original sources
USGS2024

Characterization of the water resources of the Pamunkey River watershed in Virginia—A review of water science, management, and traditional ecological knowledge

In central Virginia, the Pamunkey Indian Tribe and Reservation are facing increasingly complex water resource issues related to quantity and quality. Documentation of surface-water, groundwater, water quality, land subsidence, sea-level rise, and river ecology issues in the Pamunkey River watershed and incorporation of traditional ecological knowledge into these research topics may improve understanding of the water resources broadly. This report summarizes the relevant traditional ecological knowledge and scientific literature to elucidate gaps in the total combined knowledge of a suite of water science topics concerning the Pamunkey River watershed. This suite of water science topics includes some of the issues that the Pamunkey Indian Tribe and Reservation are facing within the watershed: fragmentation of streams and management of streamflow, flooding, degrading water quality, groundwater extraction, relative sea-level rise, rapid changes in ecosystems, loss of ecological and biological diversity, and climate change. Gaps in total combined knowledge are pervasive throughout each of these water resource topics. Identifying these knowledge gaps can help inform future research and management strategies.

Virginia↗
USGS2022

Ungulate migration in a changing climate—An initial assessment of climate impacts, management priorities, and science needs

Executive Summary Migratory behavior among ungulates in the Western United States occurs in response to changing forage quality and quantity, weather patterns, and predation risk. As snow melts and vegetation green-up begins in late spring and early summer, many migratory ungulates leave their winter range and move to higher elevation summer ranges to access high-quality forage and areas with vegetative cover for protection during fawning. Ungulates remain on these ranges until the fall when increasing snowfall and decreasing temperatures trigger them to migrate back to their lower elevation winter ranges. While researchers have begun to assess the effects of physical barriers such as roads and energy infrastructure on migration, less attention has been paid to understanding how changing climate conditions might affect ungulate movements and range habitats. Does earlier spring green-up make ungulates leave their winter ranges sooner? Do persistent drought conditions reduce the carrying capacity of seasonal range habitats or lead to shifts in migration pathways? These and other questions remain largely unanswered but could have cascading effects on ungulate population dynamics and migratory behavior. In February 2018, the Secretary of the Interior signed Department of the Interior Secretarial Order 3362 (SO3362), “Improving Habitat Quality in Western Big-Game Winter Range and Migration Corridors.” The order, which focuses on elk, mule deer, and pronghorn in 11 Western States, directs the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the National Park Service (NPS), and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to partner with State wildlife agencies on their priorities and objectives for identifying and conserving ungulate migration corridors and winter-range habitat. The USGS Climate Adaptation Science Centers (CASCs) were established to help managers of the Nation’s fish, wildlife, waters, and lands understand the effects of climate change and adapt to changing conditions. To support the recent Department of the Interior (DOI) emphasis on ungulate migration corridors and winter-range habitat, this report assesses current information on how climate change could affect elk, mule deer, and pronghorn migration. The report synthesizes the drivers of migration, outlines what is known about how climate change might affect these drivers, and summarizes management priorities and science needs related to ungulate migration corridors and range habitat. A review of the literature on ungulate migration shows that the core drivers of spring migration are the timing of spring green-up and snowmelt, and the core driver of fall migration is winter severity. After exploring what is known about how these drivers affect or could be affected by climate change, several pathways through which ungulate migration could be altered were identified: (1) ungulates alter migration timing to better track plant phenology or in response to changes in winter conditions; (2) ungulates change their migration route or distance traveled during migration to accommodate changes in environmental conditions; and (3) ungulate populations that are currently migratory may begin to demonstrate interannual variability in whether they migrate, depending on environmental conditions and density-dependence, and may remain resident for sets of consecutive years. Through discussions with managers, physical barriers to movement such as roads and fences were identified as a core concern. In addition, the primary research needs of States are the acquisition and analysis of data on ungulate movements, to refine delineation of winter range, summer range, and corridors, and to support a better understanding of how ungulates use these habitats. When it comes to understanding climate effects, managers were more concerned with understanding the vulnerability of winter- and summer-range habitats than the vulnerability of migration corridors because of the influence of summer and winter forage on ungulate condition and reproductive success. Managers were also concerned about how forage quality and quantity might change because of stressors such as drought, wildfire, and invasive species and how they might need to alter habitat-treatment strategies as a result. More baseline data are needed before effective projections of ungulate migration, at a West-wide scale under climate change, can be made. These data needs include (1) more clearly defined corridors and seasonal range habitats; (2) a comprehensive understanding of the ecological drivers of migration across ungulate species and populations; and (3) the identification of environmental thresholds for key variables that influence migration, above which ungulates alter migratory behavior. The CASCs have several opportunities to play a role in addressing these needs. The CASCs could initiate projects to identify past and potential future changes and trends in key variables known to affect ungulate migration, such as plant phenology, forage quality, or winter severity. However, it would be difficult to use this information to determine what those trends mean for ungulate migration due to the lack of knowledge about environmental thresholds for ungulates. Additional projects would be required to compare multiple years of movement data with key variables to define thresholds. Once available, information on environmental thresholds could be integrated with projections of key variables to forecast the likelihood that the migration routes or the distance traveled could change—another area in which the CASCs could contribute. A more immediate role for the CASCs would be to carry out synthesis projects. One such project could summarize the “state of the science” on the drivers of ungulate migration. Although there are dozens of population- and location-specific studies on this topic, collating this information could help highlight trends in migration drivers that span species and geographies: a necessary first step toward determining the extent to which migration drivers could be affected by climate change. A second project could focus on what is known about how climate variability and change affect ungulate life-histories, population dynamics, and migration in the Western United States. The goal of this effort could be to identify knowledge clusters and information gaps that require further investigation. Together, these synthesized products could focus future scientific activities on the most pressing issues of ungulate migration and climate change in the Western United States.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New↗
USGS2023

Geologic carbon management options for the North Atlantic-Appalachian Region

Introduction The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) North Atlantic-Appalachian Region is developing the regionwide capacity to provide timely science support for decision-makers attempting to enhance carbon removal, sequestration, and emissions mitigation to meet national atmospheric carbon reduction goals. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reported that in 2021, the fourteen States and the District of Columbia in the northeastern region account about for approximately 18 percent of the total national greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This Fact Sheet provides a summary of USGS science information and ongoing and new investigations or data-collection programs that may help the northeastern region decrease the release of carbon-containing GHG to the atmosphere.

Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachuse↗
USGS2026

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region↗
USGS2010

A method for assessing carbon stocks, carbon sequestration, and greenhouse-gas fluxes in ecosystems of the United States under present conditions and future scenarios

he Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), Section 712, mandates the U.S. Department of the Interior to develop a methodology and conduct an assessment of the Nation’s ecosystems, focusing on carbon stocks, carbon sequestration, and emissions of three greenhouse gases (GHGs): carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. The major requirements include (1) an assessment of all ecosystems (terrestrial systems, such as forests, croplands, wetlands, grasslands/shrublands; and aquatic ecosystems, such as rivers, lakes, and estuaries); (2) an estimate of the annual potential capacities of ecosystems to increase carbon sequestration and reduce net GHG emissions in the context of mitigation strategies (including management and restoration activities); and (3) an evaluation of the effects of controlling processes, such as climate change, land-use and land-cover change, and disturbances such as wildfires. The concepts of ecosystems, carbon pools, and GHG fluxes follow conventional definitions in use by major national and international assessment or inventory efforts. In order to estimate current ecosystem carbon stocks and GHG fluxes and to understand the potential capacity and effects of mitigation strategies, the method will use two time periods for the assessment: 2001 through 2010, which establishes a current ecosystem carbon and GHG baseline and will be used to validate the models; and 2011 through 2050, which will be used to assess potential capacities based on a set of scenarios. The scenario framework will be constructed using storylines of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES), along with both reference and enhanced land-use and land-cover (LULC) and land-management parameters. Additional LULC and land-management mitigation scenarios will be constructed for each storyline to increase carbon sequestration and reduce GHG fluxes in ecosystems. Input from regional experts and stakeholders will be solicited to construct these scenarios. The methods for mapping the current LULC and ecosystem disturbances will require the extensive use of both remote-sensing data and field-survey data (for example, forest inventories) to capture and characterize landscape-changing events. For potential LULC changes and ecosystem disturbances, key drivers such as socioeconomic and climate changes will be used in addition to the biophysical data. The result of these analyses will be a series of maps for each future year for each scenario. These annual maps will form the basis for estimating carbon storage and GHG emissions. For terrestrial ecosystems, carbon storage, carbon-sequestration capacities, and GHG emissions under the present conditions and future scenarios will be assessed using the LULC-change and ecosystem-disturbance estimates in map format with a spatially explicit biogeochemical ensemble modeling system that incorporates properties of management activities (such as tillage or harvesting) and properties of individual ecosystems (such as energy exchange, vegetation characteristics, hydrological cycling, and soil attributes). For aquatic ecosystems, carbon burial in sediments and fluxes of GHG are functions of the present and future potential stream flow and sediment transport and will be assessed using empirical hydrological modeling methods. Validation and uncertainty analysis methods described in the methodology will follow established guidelines to assess the quality of the assessment results. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Level II ecoregions map will be the practical instrument for developing and delivering assessment results. Consequently, the ecoregion (there are 22 modified ecoregions) will be the reporting unit of the assessment because the scenarios, assessment results, validation, and uncertainty analysis will be produced at that scale. The implementation of these methods will require collaborations among various Federal agencies, State agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and the science community. Using the method described in this document, the assessment can be completed in approximately 3 to 4 years. The primary deliverables will be assessment reports containing tables, charts, and maps that will present the estimated GHG parameters annually for 2001 through 2050 by ecosystem, pool, and scenario. The results will permit the evaluation of a range of policies, mitigation options, and research topics, such as the demographic, LULC-change, or climate-change effects on carbon stocks, carbon sequestration, and GHG fluxes in ecosystems.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2012

The ChemCam Instrument Suite on the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) Rover: Science objectives and mast unit description

ChemCam is a remote sensing instrument suite on board the "Curiosity" rover (NASA) that uses Laser-Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy (LIBS) to provide the elemental composition of soils and rocks at the surface of Mars from a distance of 1.3 to 7 m, and a telescopic imager to return high resolution context and micro-images at distances greater than 1.16 m. We describe five analytical capabilities: rock classification, quantitative composition, depth profiling, context imaging, and passive spectroscopy. They serve as a toolbox to address most of the science questions at Gale crater. ChemCam consists of a Mast-Unit (laser, telescope, camera, and electronics) and a Body-Unit (spectrometers, digital processing unit, and optical demultiplexer), which are connected by an optical fiber and an electrical interface. We then report on the development, integration, and testing of the Mast-Unit, and summarize some key characteristics of ChemCam. This confirmed that nominal or better than nominal performances were achieved for critical parameters, in particular power density (>1 GW/cm 2 ). The analysis spot diameter varies from 350 μm at 2 m to 550 μm at 7 m distance. For remote imaging, the camera field of view is 20 mrad for 1024×1024 pixels. Field tests demonstrated that the resolution (˜90 μrad) made it possible to identify laser shots on a wide variety of images. This is sufficient for visualizing laser shot pits and textures of rocks and soils. An auto-exposure capability optimizes the dynamical range of the images. Dedicated hardware and software focus the telescope, with precision that is appropriate for the LIBS and imaging depths-of-field. The light emitted by the plasma is collected and sent to the Body-Unit via a 6 m optical fiber. The companion to this paper (Wiens et al. this issue) reports on the development of the Body-Unit, on the analysis of the emitted light, and on the good match between instrument performance and science specifications.

Space Science Reviews↗
USGS2002

The Cascadia Subduction Zone and related subduction systems: Seismic structure, intraslab earthquakes and processes, and earthquake hazards

The following report is the principal product of an international workshop titled “Intraslab Earthquakes in the Cascadia Subduction System: Science and Hazards” and was sponsored by the U.S. Geological Survey, the Geological Survey of Canada and the University of Victoria. This meeting was held at the University of Victoria’s Dunsmuir Lodge, Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada on September 18–21, 2000 and brought 46 participants from the U.S., Canada, Latin America and Japan. This gathering was organized to bring together active research investigators in the science of subduction and intraslab earthquake hazards. Special emphasis was given to “warm-slab” subduction systems, i.e., those systems involving young oceanic lithosphere subducting at moderate to slow rates, such as the Cascadia system in the U.S. and Canada, and the Nankai system in Japan. All the speakers and poster presenters provided abstracts of their presentations that were a made available in an abstract volume at the workshop. Most of the authors subsequently provided full articles or extended abstracts for this volume on the topics that they discussed at the workshop. Where updated versions were not provided, the original workshop abstracts have been included. By organizing this workshop and assembling this volume, our aim is to provide a global perspective on the science of warm-slab subduction, to thereby advance our understanding of internal slab processes and to use this understanding to improve appraisals of the hazards associated with large intraslab earthquakes in the Cascadia system. These events have been the most frequent and damaging earthquakes in western Washington State over the last century. As if to underscore this fact, just six months after this workshop was held, the magnitude 6.8 Nisqually earthquake occurred on February 28th, 2001 at a depth of about 55 km in the Juan de Fuca slab beneath the southern Puget Sound region of western Washington. The Governor’s Office of the State of Washington estimated damage at more than US$2 billion, making it among the costliest earthquakes in U.S. history.

California, Oregon, Washington↗
USGS1976

United States Geological Survey Annual Report, Fiscal Year 1975

The Survey resumes the practice of annually summarizing the progress it has made in identifying the Nation's land, water, energy, and mineral resources, classifying federally owned mineral lands and waterpower sites, and in supervising the exploration and development of energy and mineral resources on Federal and Indian lands. The Annual Report for 1975 consists of five parts: * The Year in Review - a review of the issues and events which affected Survey programs and highlights of program accomplishments. * Perspectives - several short papers which address major resource issues and summarize recent advances in the earth sciences. * A description of the Survey's budget, programs, and accomplishments. * A set of statistical tables and related information which documents program trends, workloads, and accomplishments. * A compendium of Survey publications and information services available to the public. One purpose of this report is to increase public awareness and understanding of the Geological Survey's programs and, more generally, of the role of earth sciences information in helping to resolve many of the natural resource conflicts that face our society now and in the years ahead. To be useful, however, information must be available and readily accessible to those responsible for natural resource policy at the time that the decisions are made. This report emphasizes the types of information products and services provided by the Survey and tells how to obtain additional information.

Annual Report↗
USGS2008

Environmental presence and persistence of pharmaceuticals: An overview

Emerging contaminants (ECs) in the environment – that is, chemicals with domestic, municipal, industrial, or agricultural sources that are not commonly monitored but may have the potential for adverse environmental effects – is a rapidly growing field of research. The use of “emerging” is not intended to infer that the presence of these compounds in the environment is new. These chemicals have been released into the environment as long as they have been in production or, in the case of hormones and other endogenous compounds, since the rise of animal life. What is emerging is the interest by the scientific and lay communities in the presence of these chemicals in the environment, the analytical capabilities required for detection, and the subtle effects that very small concentrations of these chemicals appear to have on aquatic biota. In December 2006, Environmental Science & Technology devoted an entire special issue (volume 40, number 23) to the topic of ECs, illustrating the increased interest in the subject. Within the EGs, one particular class that has seen a substantial increase in research over the past 10 years is pharmaceuticals and personal-care products (PPCPs). This increased research interest can be demonstrated by several means, including requests for proposals from funding agencies, but the clearest indication of a focused effort to understand the introduction, transformation, and potential health and environmental effects of PPCPs and ECs, in general, is the number of published reports. This increase can be shown by examining six environmental journals that regularly publish PPCP-related papers – Chemosphere , Environmental Science & Technology , Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry , Science of the Total Environment , Water Research , and Water Science and Technology . In 1998 there were 22 papers published on pharmaceuticals, antibiotics, or drugs in these 6 journals; by 2006, this number increased sixfold to 132 papers (Figure 1.1). This growth can be attributed to a number of factors. The presence of pharmaceuticals in surface-water samples from Europe and the United States was documented in several sentinel papers. These ground-breaking works encouraged other scientists to examine the rivers, streams, lakes, and reservoirs in their regions for such chemicals. In addition, the intense public attention paid to news reports on the environmental detections of these chemicals and possible effects of aquatic life has made this issue visible to the wastewater-treatment, drinking-water treatment, and regulatory communities. This has driven the funding bodies associated with these communities to fund studies or request proposals that address the presence, fate, and effects of PPCPs in aquatic systems. The release of the first comprehensive reconnaissance of pharmaceuticals and other wastewater contaminants in the United States provides an example of the intense media interest in this topic. Within 6 days on online publication of this study, 72 newspapers across the United States had published articles describing the results, either locally written or based on international media syndicate reports. There also was substantial concurrent coverage by local and national radio and television outlets, including the Cable News Network, ABC World News Tonight , and National Public Radio. A substantial fraction of these news stories may be attributable to press releases and media briefings prior to publication. However, the interest by television and print journalists in reporting the results of a peer-reviewed journal article to the general public was motivated by the recognition that describing the presence of PPCPs in water supplies would be of interest to the public. To better convey the results of the study published by Koplin et al. to the public, a separate general-interest fact sheet was published to summarize the important points of the study. Because PPCPs are commonly and widely used by individuals, there is likely a preexisting, personal identification with these compounds that does not occur for the wide range of other organic and inorganic contaminants whose presence in the environment has previously been described. This greater public “name recognition” makes itself known through the media to the regulatory and technical community and has prompted interest in sponsoring research that defines the composition and concentrations of PPCPs in potential sources and their fate and effects following relase into the environment. Independent of the drivers that potentially fuel the interest in studies of PPCPs, it is clear that PPCP research has grown beyond surface-water studies to examine issues such as: • Presence in other matrices, such as groundwater, landfill leachates, sediments, and biosolids. • Environmental transport and fate in surface water, groundwater, and soils amended with reclaimed water or biosolids. • PPCP source elucidation, such as wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) effluents, confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs), and aquaculture. • Removal during wastewater and drinking-water treatment. • Effects on aquatic ecosystems, terrestrial ecosystems, and human health. The chapters in this book provide an extensive examination of current environmental pharmaceutical research and are divided into three sections: “Occurrence and Analysis of Pharmaceuticals in the Environment,” “Environment Fate and Transformations of Veterinary Pharmaceuticals,” and “treatment of Pharmaceuticals in Drinking Water and Wastewater.” The purpose of this introductory overview chapter is to outline current (2004-2006) knowledge about the presence and concentration of PPCPs as described in the published literature. Previous reviews should be consulted for discussions on pre-2004 publications. Those reviews will provide the reader with a comprehensive introduction to the topic of PPCPs in the environment. This chapter describes the sources of PPCPs and other organic contaminants often associated with human wastewater into the environment, the range of concentrations present in various environmental compartments, and the potential routes of removal/sequestration. An overview of the sources and fate of veterinary pharmaceuticals will be discussed in Chapter 5, “Fate and Transport of Veterinary Medicines in the Soil Environment.”

Book chapter↗
USGS2020

Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units program—2019 year in review postcard

Acting Chief’s Message Dear friends, I invite you to take a look at U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1463, “Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program—2019 Year in Review,” now available at https://doi.org/10.3133/cir1463 . In this report, you will find details about the Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units (CRU) program concerning fish and wildlife science, students, staffing, vacancies, research funding, outreach and training, awards, accolades, and professional services. You will also see examples of unit projects with information on how results have been or are being applied by our cooperators. Throughout the year, keep up with our research projects at https://www1.usgs.gov/coopunits/Headquarters/ . Regards, John D. Thompson

General Information Product↗
USGS1999

Digital mining claim density map for federal lands in Arizona: 1996

This report describes a digital map generated by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to provide digital spatial mining claim density information for federal lands in Arizona as of March 1997. Mining claim data is earth science information deemed to be relevant to the assessment of historic, current, and future ecological, economic, and social systems. There is no paper map included in this Open-File report. In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA), all unpatented mining claims, mill, and tunnel sites must be recorded at the appropriate BLM State office. BLM maintains a cumulative computer listing of mining claims in the MCRS database with locations given by meridian, township, range, and section. A mining claim is considered closed when the claim is relinquished or a formal BLM decision declaring the mining claim null and void has been issued and the appeal period has expired. All other mining claims filed with BLM are considered to be open and actively held. The digital map (figure 1.) with the mining claim density database available in this report are suitable for geographic information system (GIS)-based regional assessments at a scale of 1:100,000 or smaller.

Arizona↗
USGS1999

Digital mining claim density map for federal lands in Utah: 1996

This report describes a digital map generated by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to provide digital spatial mining claim density information for federal lands in Utah as of March 1997. Mining claim data is earth science information deemed to be relevant to the assessment of historic, current, and future ecological, economic, and social systems. There is no paper map included in this Open-File report. In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA), all unpatented mining claims, mill, and tunnel sites must be recorded at the appropriate BLM State office. BLM maintains a cumulative computer listing of mining claims in the MCRS database with locations given by meridian, township, range, and section. A mining claim is considered closed when the claim is relinquished or a formal BLM decision declaring the mining claim null and void has been issued and the appeal period has expired. All other mining claims filed with BLM are considered to be open and actively held. The digital map (figure 1.) with the mining claim density database available in this report are suitable for geographic information system (GIS)-based regional assessments at a scale of 1:100,000 or smaller.

Utah↗
USGS1999

Digital mining claim density map for federal lands in Washington: 1996

This report describes a digital map generated by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to provide digital spatial mining claim density information for federal lands in Washington as of March 1997. Mining claim data is earth science information deemed to be relevant to the assessment of historic, current, and future ecological, economic, and social systems. There is no paper map included in this Open-File report. In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA), all unpatented mining claims, mill, and tunnel sites must be recorded at the appropriate BLM State office. BLM maintains a cumulative computer listing of mining claims in the Mining Claim Recordation System (MCRS) database with locations given by meridian, township, range, and section. A mining claim is considered closed when the claim is relinquished or a formal BLM decision declaring the mining claim null and void has been issued and the appeal period has expired. All other mining claims filed with BLM are considered to be open and actively held. The digital map (figure 1.) with the mining claim density database available in this report are suitable for geographic information system (GIS)-based regional assessments at a scale of 1:100,000 or smaller.

Washington↗
USGS1999

Digital mining claim density map for federal lands in California: 1996

This report describes a digital map generated by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to provide digital spatial mining claim density information for federal lands in California as of March 1997. Mining claim data is earth science information deemed to be relevant to the assessment of historic, current, and future ecological, economic, and social systems. There is no paper map included in this Open-File report. In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA), all unpatented mining claims, mill, and tunnel sites must be recorded at the appropriate BLM State office. BLM maintains a cumulative computer listing of mining claims in the MCRS database with locations given by meridian, township, range, and section. A mining claim is considered closed when the claim is relinquished or a formal BLM decision declaring the mining claim null and void has been issued and the appeal period has expired. All other mining claims filed with BLM are considered to be open and actively held. The digital map (figure 1.) with the mining claim density database available in this report are suitable for geographic information system (GIS)-based regional assessments at a scale of 1:100,000 or smaller.

California↗
USGS1999

Digital mining claim density map for federal lands in Colorado: 1996

This report describes a digital map generated by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to provide digital spatial mining claim density information for federal lands in Colorado as of March 1997. Mining claim data is earth science information deemed to be relevant to the assessment of historic, current, and future ecological, economic, and social systems. There is no paper map included in this Open-File report. In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA), all unpatented mining claims, mill, and tunnel sites must be recorded at the appropriate BLM State office. BLM maintains a cumulative computer listing of mining claims in the Mining Claim Recordation System (MCRS) database with locations given by meridian, township, range, and section. A mining claim is considered closed when the claim is relinquished or a formal BLM decision declaring the mining claim null and void has been issued and the appeal period has expired. All other mining claims filed with BLM are considered to be open and actively held. The digital map (figure 1.) with the mining claim density database available in this report are suitable for geographic information system (GIS)-based regional assessments at a scale of 1:100,000 or smaller.

Colorado↗