USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Arid Land Research and Management”

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.

57 records · Page 4Linked to original sources
USGS2014

Habitat prioritization across large landscapes, multiple seasons, and novel areas: an example using greater sage-grouse in Wyoming

Animal habitat selection is an important and expansive area of research in ecology. In particular, the study of habitat selection is critical in habitat prioritization efforts for species of conservation concern. Landscape planning for species is happening at ever-increasing extents because of the appreciation for the role of landscape-scale patterns in species persistence coupled to improved datasets for species and habitats, and the expanding and intensifying footprint of human land uses on the landscape. We present a large-scale collaborative effort to develop habitat selection models across large landscapes and multiple seasons for prioritizing habitat for a species of conservation concern. Greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus , hereafter sage-grouse) occur in western semi-arid landscapes in North America. Range-wide population declines of this species have been documented, and it is currently considered as “warranted but precluded” from listing under the United States Endangered Species Act. Wyoming is predicted to remain a stronghold for sage-grouse populations and contains approximately 37% of remaining birds. We compiled location data from 14 unique radiotelemetry studies (data collected 1994–2010) and habitat data from high-quality, biologically relevant, geographic information system (GIS) layers across Wyoming. We developed habitat selection models for greater sage-grouse across Wyoming for 3 distinct life stages: 1) nesting, 2) summer, and 3) winter. We developed patch and landscape models across 4 extents, producing statewide and regional (southwest, central, northeast) models for Wyoming. Habitat selection varied among regions and seasons, yet preferred habitat attributes generally matched the extensive literature on sage-grouse seasonal habitat requirements. Across seasons and regions, birds preferred areas with greater percentage sagebrush cover and avoided paved roads, agriculture, and forested areas. Birds consistently preferred areas with higher precipitation in the summer and avoided rugged terrain in the winter. Selection for sagebrush cover varied regionally with stronger selection in the Northeast region, likely because of limited availability, whereas avoidance of paved roads was fairly consistent across regions. We chose resource selection function (RSF) thresholds for each model set (seasonal × regional combination) that delineated important seasonal habitats for sage-grouse. Each model set showed good validation and discriminatory capabilities within study-site boundaries. We applied the nesting-season models to a novel area not included in model development. The percentage of independent nest locations that fell directly within identified important habitat was not overly impressive in the novel area (49%); however, including a 500-m buffer around important habitat captured 98% of independent nest locations within the novel area. We also used leks and associated peak male counts as a proxy for nesting habitat outside of the study sites used to develop the models. A 1.5-km buffer around the important nesting habitat boundaries included 77% of males counted at leks in Wyoming outside of the study sites. Data were not available to quantitatively test the performance of the summer and winter models outside our study sites. The collection of models presented here represents large-scale resource-management planning tools that are a significant advancement to previous tools in terms of spatial and temporal resolution.

Wyoming↗
USGS1976

Summary appraisals of the nation's ground-water resources – California region

Most people in the California Region live in a semiarid or arid climate, with precipitation less than the potential evapotranspiration- environments of perennial water deficiency. The deficiency becomes most onerous during the characteristically rainless summers and during recurrent droughts that may continue for 10--20 years. However, water from winter rain and snow can be stored for use during the dry summer months, and water stored during a wet climatic period can be used in a succeeding dry period; moreover, perennial deficiency can be overcome by bringing water from areas of perennial surplus. Ground-water reservoirs have especial significance in arid and semiarid regions as repositories where water is stored or can be stored with minimum loss by evaporation. Nearly all the ground-water reservoirs of the California Region are in alluvial sediments of valleys and plains that flank the mountain ranges. The largest, underlying the vast Central Valley, occupies 10 percent of the area of the region, has an estimated usable capacity exceeding 100 million acre-feet (125 cubic kilometres), and has an annual pumpage from wells of about 13 million acre-feet (16 cubic kilometres). Another 10 percent of the region is occupied by 55 developed ground-water reservoirs that are widely distributed; aggregate annual pumpage from them is about 3 1/2 million acre-feet (4 cubic kilometres). In the southeastern desert about 60 ground-water reservoirs occupy still another 10 percent of the region; these have been explored only enough to show that most have some usable water, but current use is negligible. In northeastern California and adjacent Oregon and Nevada, ground-water reservoirs are identified only in valleys and lowlands where wells are feasible, but basaltic rocks of the Cascade Range and Modoc Plateau are excellent aquifers distributed over an area constituting about 15 percent of the region. In sum, slightly less than half the California Region is underlain by ground-water reservoirs, either in valley fill or in volcanic rocks, which can yield significant quantities of water to wells. The rest of the California Region includes the mountains, canyons, slopes, and foothills of the Sierra Nevada, Coast Ranges, and Basin Ranges, whose consolidated rocks and products of their weathering may be permeable locally but are not generally so. Here, the prevailing method of ground-water development is still mostly trial and error, and while in many places a well can yield enough water for a family, some families might have to do without amenities such as flush toilets and automatic washers. For more than half a century the California Region has led all others in North America in pumping of ground water as well as in the area, variety, yield, and export of crops irrigated by water from wells. It has led in the development and use of deep-well turbine pumps for large yield and in the drilling of water wells to great depths. At the same time, such developments have resulted in the elimination of artesian pressures that produced thousands of flowing wells in the 19th century and led to the wide distribution of "falling water tables." Also, California was first to induce encroachment of seawater into wells (in 1906); first to recognize subsidence of land caused by pumping from wells (in 1933), generating news about land sinking in San Jose, Long Beach, and along the Delta-Mendota and Friant-Kern Canals; and first to experience pollution of ground-water reservoirs by brines, chemicals, industrial wastes, and petroleum byproducts including gasoline. The region has led in research in several fields leading to solution of many of these problems. Ground-water problems developed rapidly after World War II with booming population, agriculture, industry, and water demand during several years of regionwide drought. Water levels in wells trended downward almost everywhere as a natural effect of the drought and at accelerated rates in areas of pumping for new enterprises or to supplement subnormal surface-water supplies. The declines in many pumping areas exceeded 100 feet (30 metres), and in some confined aquifers the potentiometric surface was drawn down more than 330 feet (100 metres). The depletion of ground-water storage has had "permanent" side effects, including subsidence of the land exceeding 10 feet (3 metres) in extensive areas, and seawater intrusion that ended the useful lives of many wells along the coast and as much as 6 miles (10 kilometres) inland. Some problems have been solved, but these solutions have at times created other problems. Many ground-water reservoirs have gone through one or more stages - exploration for productive aquifers, exploitation and development for use of the water, restriction to the perennial supply or "safe" yield, importation of surface water, artificial recharge of ground water, conjunctive use of surface and ground water, protection of water quality, and integrated management of use and disposal of water. This evolutionary sequence is unique for each reservoir, and so generalizations become difficult in a regional appraisal; also, the changes with time are significant and varied, and knowledge of prior events is a prerequisite in an appraisal of the resource in a specific year. As of 1970, water levels in many wells had risen significantly from the minimum levels of record reached during the 1960's or earlier; only in areas of new development and in desert areas of long-continued "mining" of nonreplenished water was ground-water storage still being depleted. Land subsidence has continued at diminishing rates and practically has come to a halt in some areas; invading seawater has been stopped or nudged back in most places where problems were significant. The current, favorable situation has been helped by climatic variations, from drought in 1945-52 and exceedingly dry years in 1959 and 1961 to above-normal precipitation in 1969 and 1970; but most of the serious problems have been solved by human efforts, including especially the implementation of the California Water Plan, transporting water from areas of perennial surplus to areas where it is used in lieu of ground water or for ground-water replenishment. All major urban areas now import water to supplement or replace the water pumped from wells. Extensive agricultural areas that formerly were irrigated solely by ground water now obtain some of their water from surface reservoirs and canals, especially in the Central Valley. With surface water available as an alternative supply, well owners can view their ground water with complacency. But complacency can lead to neglect and carelessness and consequent deterioration of the ground-water resource by pollution. Claiming heritage from the English Common Law, the existing California law grants to the landowner (riparian) and private enterprise (appropriator) rights to the water stored in ground-water reservoirs or discharged from them, including the base flow of streams. Ground-water development has been by private and local enterprise, and the California legislature has protected and encouraged local responsibility, control, and management of ground water. As to surface water, a constitutional amendment in 1928 limited riparian rights to the quantities of water that were "reasonably required for the beneficial use to be served." The surpluses have become public waters which are collected, stored, transported, and delivered under various contracts by Federal, State, and other agencies. The agencies have not stored water underground because of uncertainty as to their rights, but some local agencies have been encouraged with favorable pricing schedules to undertake the artificial recharge and management of ground-water reservoirs. Thus, conjunctive use of surface and ground water has become a matter of interagency negotiation. Of all the constraints on effective use of ground-water reservoirs, the most formidable may be the attitudes of people. Assurance of water supply is vital in areas of water deficiency, and Government has assumed increasing responsibility for the welfare of people in these areas. Unfortunately, when Government provides this assurance, most beneficiaries demand continued subsidy to the exclusion of perhaps cheaper private development. Indeed, as the water resources are presently segregated-with private rights predominant in ground water and public interest dominant in surface water-ground-water development has suffered for lack of public concern. The region has the scientific and technologic capability for effective use of groundwater reservoirs, as shown by the achievements and programs of several districts, but many districts are not organized or staffed for such comprehensive management and will need assistance and scientific expertise available from State and Federal agencies. Those agencies, in turn, may not have the scientific data that are essential to prevent haphazard activities and to enable programs to be organized for the most effective and attractive utilization of the water resources. In these days of increasing concern over pollution, existing data are generally inadequate to assess the natural deterioration of ground waters as a basis for defining pollution.

California↗
USGS2014

U.S. Geological Survey Karst Interest Group Proceedings, Carlsbad, New Mexico, April 29-May 2, 2014

Karst aquifer systems are present throughout parts of the United States and some of its territories, and have developed in carbonate rocks (primarily limestone and dolomite) that span an interval of time encompassing more than 550 million years. The depositional environments, diagenetic processes, post-depositional tectonic events, and geochemical weathering processes that form karst aquifers are varied and complex, and involve biological, chemical, and physical changes. These factors, combined with the diverse climatic regimes under which karst development in these rocks has taken place, result in the unique dual- or triple-porosity nature of karst aquifers. These complex hydrogeologic systems typically represent challenging and unique conditions to scientists attempting to study groundwater flow and contaminant transport in these terrains. The dissolution of carbonate rocks and the subsequent development of distinct and beautiful landscapes, caverns, and springs has resulted in the most exceptional karst areas of the United States being designated as national or state parks; commercial caverns and known privately owned caves number in the tens of thousands. Both public and private properties provide access for scientists to study the flow of groundwater in situ. Likewise, the range and complexity of landforms and groundwater flow systems associated with karst terrains are enormous, perhaps more than for any other aquifer type. Karst aquifers and landscapes that form in tropical areas, such as the cockpit karst along the north coast of Puerto Rico, differ greatly from karst landforms in more arid climates, such as the Edwards Plateau in west-central Texas or the Guadalupe Mountains near Carlsbad, New Mexico, where hypogenic processes have played a major role in speleogenesis. Many of these public and private lands also contain unique flora and fauna associated with these karst hydrogeologic systems. As a result, numerous federal, state, and local agencies have a strong interest in the study of karst terrains. Many of the major springs and aquifers in the United States have developed in carbonate rocks, such as the Floridan aquifer system in Florida and parts of Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina; the Ozark Plateaus aquifer system in parts of Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma; and the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system in west-central Texas. These aquifers, and the springs that discharge from them, serve as major water-supply sources and as unique ecological habitats. Competition for the water resources of karst aquifers is common, and urban development and the lack of attenuation of contaminants in karst areas can impact the ecosystem and water quality of these aquifers. The concept for developing a platform for interaction among scientists within the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) working on karst-related studies evolved from the November 1999 National Ground-Water Meeting of the USGS. As a result, the Karst Interest Group (KIG) was formed in 2000. The KIG is a loose-knit, grass-roots organization of USGS and non-USGS scientists and researchers devoted to fostering better communication among scientists working on, or interested in, karst science. The primary mission of the KIG is to encourage and support interdisciplinary collaboration and technology transfer among scientists working in karst areas. Additionally, the KIG encourages collaborative studies between the different mission areas of the USGS as well as other federal and state agencies, and with researchers from academia and institutes. The KIG also encourages younger scientists by participation of students in the poster and oral sessions. To accomplish its mission, the KIG has organized a series of workshops that are held near nationally important karst areas. To date (2014) six KIG workshops, including the workshop documented in this report, have been held. The workshops typically include oral and poster sessions on selected karst-related topics and research, as well as field trips to local karst features. Proceedings of the workshops are published by the USGS and are available online at http://water.usgs.gov/ogw/karst/kig . The first KIG workshop was held in St. Petersburg, Florida, February 13–16, 2001, in the vicinity of the large springs and other karst features of the Floridan aquifer system. The second KIG workshop was held August 20–22, 2002, in Shepherdstown, West Virginia, in proximity to the carbonate aquifers of the northern Shenandoah Valley and highlighted an invited presentation on karst literature by the late Barry F. Beck of P.E. LaMoreaux and Associates. The third KIG workshop was held September 12–15, 2005, in Rapid City, South Dakota, nearby to karst features in evaporites and limestones of the Madison Group in the Black Hills of South Dakota, including Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument. The workshop also included a featured presentation by Thomas Casadevall, Central Region Director, USGS, on the status of earth science at the USGS and evening trips to Jewel Cave led by Mike Wiles, National Park Service (NPS) and Wind Cave led by Rod Horrocks, NPS. The fourth KIG workshop was held May 27–29, 2008, and hosted by the Hoffman Environmental Research Institute and Center for Cave and Karst Studies at Western Kentucky University in Bowling Green, Kentucky, near Mammoth Cave National Park and karst features of the Chester Upland and Pennyroyal Plateau. The workshop featured a late-night field trip into Mammoth Cave with Rickard Toomey and Rick Olsen, NPS. The fifth workshop was held April 26–29, 2011, and was a joint meeting of the USGS KIG and University of Arkansas HydroDays, hosted by the Department of Geosciences at the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville. The workshop featured an outstanding field trip to the unique karst terrain along the Buffalo National River of the southern Ozarks and a keynote presentation on paleokarst in the United States by Art and Peggy Palmer. This sixth and current 2014 KIG workshop is hosted by the National Cave and Karst Research Institute (NCKRI) in Carlsbad, New Mexico, with Director of NCKRI, George Veni, serving as co-chair of the workshop with Eve Kuniansky, USGS. The session planning committee for this sixth workshop includes Van Brahana, USGS retired and University of Arkansas Professor Emeritus; Tom Byl, USGS and Tennessee State University; Zelda Bailey, former Director of NCKRI and retired Director, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Boulder Laboratory, Colorado; Patrick Tucci, USGS retired; and Mike Bradley, Allan Clark, Geoff Delin, Daniel Doctor, James Kaufmann, Eve Kuniansky, Randy Orndorff, Larry Spangler, and Dave Weary of the USGS. The karst hydrology field trip on Thursday will be led by Lewis Land (NCKRI karst hydrologist) and the optional Friday field trip on the geology of Carlsbad Caverns National Park will be led by George Veni. The keynote speaker is Dr. Penelope Boston, Director of Cave and Karst Studies at New Mexico Tech, Socorro, and Academic Director at NCKRI, who will address the future of karst research. Additionally, there is a featured presentation “Irish karst and its management,” by Caoimhe Hickey, The Geological Survey of Ireland, preceding a panel discussion on “Collaboration During Times of Limited Resources.” The extended abstracts of USGS authors were peer reviewed and approved for publication by the U.S. Geological Survey. Articles submitted by university researchers and other federal and state agencies did not go through the formal USGS peer review and approval process, and therefore may not adhere to our editorial standards or stratigraphic nomenclature and is not research conducted or data collected by the USGS. However, all articles had at a minimum of two peer reviews, and all articles were edited for consistency of appearance in the published Proceedings. The use of trade, firm or product names in any article is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. The USGS, Office of Groundwater, provides technical support for the Karst Interest Group website and public availability of the Proceedings from these workshops, and the USGS Groundwater Resources Program funds the publication costs. Finally, the cover illustration is the work of Ann Tihansky, USGS, used since the first KIG workshop in 2000.

Scientific Investigations Report↗