USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Science Authors 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 91 records · Page 5Linked to original sources
USGS1986

Selenium concentrations in leaf material from Astragalus Oxyphysus (diablo locoweed) and Atriplex Lentiformis (quail bush) in the interior Coast Ranges and the western San Joaquin Valley, California

Leaf material from selenium accumulating plants was collected and analyzed for selenium to obtain a relative indication of selenium concentrations in soils and identify sites suitable for further soil study. Selenium concentrations of 14 samples of leaf material from Astragalus oxyphysus ranged from 0.08 to 3.5 microg/g dry weight and had a median concentration of 0.25 microg/g. Five replicate samples of A. oxyphysus had a mean selenium concentration of 0.22 microg/g and a standard deviation of 0.07. Selenium concentrations of 17 samples of leaf material from Atriplex lentiformis ranged from 0.08 to 7.5 microg/g and had a median concentration of 0.35 microg/g. As a general guideline, the National Academy of Sciences recommends a maximum safe tolerance level of 2 microg/g of selenium in animal feeds. One sample of A. oxyphysus, collected in the Panoche Creek drainage, exceeded 2 mcirog/g. Three samples of A. lentiformis, collected in Klipstein Canyon, Tumey Fan, and Panoche Fan, equaled or exceeded 2 microg/g. These sites may be suitable. (Author 's abstract)

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗
USGS2011

Range-wide assessment of livestock grazing across the sagebrush biome

Domestic livestock grazing occurs in virtually all sagebrush habitats and is a prominent disturbance factor. By affecting habitat condition and trend, grazing influences the resources required by, and thus, the distribution and abundance of sagebrush-obligate wildlife species (for example, sage-grouse Centrocercus spp.). Yet, the risks that livestock grazing may pose to these species and their habitats are not always clear. Although livestock grazing intensity and associated habitat condition may be known in many places at the local level, we have not yet been able to answer questions about use, condition, and trend at the landscape scale or at the range-wide scale for wildlife species. A great deal of information about grazing use, management regimes, and ecological condition exists at the local level (for individual livestock management units) under the oversight of organizations such as the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). However, the extent, quality, and types of existing data are unknown, which hinders the compilation, mapping, or analysis of these data. Once compiled, these data may be helpful for drawing conclusions about rangeland status, and we may be able to identify relationships between those data and wildlife habitat at the landscape scale. The overall objective of our study was to perform a range-wide assessment of livestock grazing effects (and the relevant supporting data) in sagebrush ecosystems managed by the BLM. Our assessments and analyses focused primarily on local-level management and data collected at the scale of BLM grazing allotments (that is, individual livestock management units). Specific objectives included the following: 1. Identify and refine existing range-wide datasets to be used for analyses of livestock grazing effects on sagebrush ecosystems. 2. Assess the extent, quality, and types of livestock grazing-related natural resource data collected by BLM range-wide (i.e., across allotments, districts and regions). 3. Compile and synthesize recommendations from federal and university rangeland science experts about how BLM might prioritize collection of different types of livestock grazing-related natural resource data. 4. Investigate whether range-wide datasets (Objective 1) could be used in conjunction with remotely sensed imagery to identify across broad scales (a) allotments potentially not meeting BLM Land Health Standards (LHS) and (b) allotments in which unmet standards might be attributable to livestock grazing. Objective 1: We identified four datasets that potentially could be used for analyses of livestock grazing effects on sagebrush ecosystems. First, we obtained the most current spatial data (typically up to 2007, 2008, or 2009) for all BLM allotments and compiled data into a coarse, topologically enforced dataset that delineated grazing allotment boundaries. Second, we obtained LHS evaluation data (as of 2007) for all allotments across all districts and regions; these data included date of most recent evaluation, BLM determinations of whether region-specific standards were met, and whether BLM deemed livestock to have contributed to any unmet standards. Third, we examined grazing records of three types: Actual Use (permittee-reported), Billed Use (BLM-reported), and Permitted Use (legally authorized). Finally, we explored the possibility of using existing Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Ecological Site Description (ESD) data to make up-to-date estimates of production and forage availability on BLM allotments. Objective 2: We investigated the availability of BLM livestock grazing-related monitoring data and the status of LHS across 310 randomly selected allotments in 13 BLM field offices. We found that, relative to other data types, the most commonly available monitoring data were Actual Use numbers (permittee-reported livestock numbers and season-of-use), followed by Photo Point, forage Utilization, and finally, Vegetation Trend measurement data. Data availability and frequency of data collection varied across allotments and field offices. Analysis of the BLM's LHS data indicated 67 percent of allotments analyzed were meeting standards. For those not meeting standards, livestock were considered the causal factor in 45 percent of cases (about 15 percent of all allotments). Objective 3: We sought input from 42 university and federal rangeland science experts about how best to prioritize rangeland monitoring activities associated with ascertaining livestock impacts on vegetation resources. When we presented a hypothetical scenario to these scientists and asked them to prioritize monitoring activities, the most common response was to measure ground and vegetation cover, a variable that in many cases (10 of 13 field offices sampled) BLM had already identified as a monitoring priority. Experts identified several other traditional (for example, photo points) and emerging approaches (for example, high-resolution aerial photography) to monitoring. Objective 4: We used spatial allotment data (described in Objective 1) and remotely sensed vegetation data (sagebrush cover, herbaceous vegetation cover, litter and bare soil) to assess differences in allotment LHS status ("Not met" vs. "Met"; if "Not met" - livestock-caused vs. not). We then developed logistic regression models, using vegetation variables to predict LHS status of BLM allotments in sagebrush steppe habitats in Wyoming and portions of Montana and Colorado. In general, we found that more consistent data collection at the local level might improve suitability of data for broad-scale analyses of livestock impacts. As is, data collection methodologies varied across field offices and States, and we did not find any local-level monitoring data (Actual Use, Utilization, Vegetation Trend) that had been collected consistently enough over time or space for range-wide analyses. Moreover, continued and improved emphasis on monitoring also may aid local management decisions, particularly with respect to effects of livestock grazing. Rangeland science experts identified ground cover as a high monitoring priority for assessing range condition and emphasized the importance of tracking livestock numbers and grazing dates. Ultimately, the most effective monitoring program may entail both increased data collection effort and the integration of alternative monitoring approaches (for example, remote sensing or monitoring teams). In the course of our study, we identified three additional datasets that could potentially be used for range-wide analyses: spatial allotment boundary data for all BLM allotments range-wide, LHS evaluations of BLM allotments, and livestock use data (livestock numbers and grazing dates). It may be possible to use these spatial datasets to help prioritize monitoring activities over the extensive land areas managed by BLM. We present an example of how we used spatial allotment boundary data and LHS data to test whether remotely sensed vegetation characteristics could be used to predict which allotments met or did not meet LHS. This approach may be further improved by the results of current efforts by BLM to test whether more intensive (higher resolution) LHS assessments more accurately describe land health status. Standardized data collection in more ecologically meaningful land units may improve our ability to use local-level data for broad-scale analyses.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2010

Sedimentation Survey of Lago Patillas, Puerto Rico, March 2007

Lago Patillas is a reservoir located on the confluence of Rio Grande de Patillas and Rio Marin, in the municipality of Patillas in southern Puerto Rico, about 3 kilometers north of the town of Patillas and about 8 kilometers northeast of the town of Arroyo (fig. 1). The dam is owned and operated by the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (PREPA) and was constructed in 1914 for the irrigation of croplands in the southern coastal plains of Puerto Rico along the towns of Arroyo, Guayama, Patillas, and Salinas. Irrigation releases are made through the outlet works into the Patillas Irrigation Canal that extends 32.2 kilometers from the Patillas dam to Rio Salinas. The dam is a semi-hydraulic earthfill with a structural height of 44.80 meters, a top width of 4.57 meters, a base width of 190.49 meters, and a crest length of 325.21 meters. The spillway structure is physically separated from the earthfill dam, has an elevation of 58.21 meters above mean sea level, and has three radial arm gates (Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, 1979). The reservoir impounds the waters of the Rio Grande de Patillas and Rio Marin. The reservoir has a drainage area of 66.3 square kilometers. Additional information and operational procedures are listed in Soler-Lopez and others (1999). During March 14-15, 2007, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Caribbean Water Science Center (CWSC), in cooperation with the PREPA conducted a bathymetric survey of Lago Patillas to update the reservoir storage capacity and update the reservoir sedimentation rate by comparing the 2007 bathymetric survey data with previous 1997 data. The purpose of this report is to update the reservoir storage capacity, sedimentation rates, and areas of substantial sediment accumulation since April 1997.

Lago Patillas;Puerto Rico↗
USGS2011

Comment on "Changes in climatic water balance drive downhill shifts in plant species' optimum elevations"

Crimmins et al . (Reports, 21 January 2011, p. 324) attributed an apparent downward elevational shift of California plant species to a precipitation-induced decline in climatic water deficit. We show that the authors miscalculated deficit, that the apparent decline in species’ elevations is likely a consequence of geographic biases, and that unlike temperature changes, precipitation changes should not be expected to cause coordinated directional shifts in species’ elevations.

California↗
USGS2011

Libraries program

The U.S. Congress authorized a library for the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in 1879. The library was formally established in 1882 with the naming of the first librarian and began with a staff of three and a collection of 1,400 books. Today, the USGS Libraries Program is one of the world's largest Earth and natural science repositories and a resource of national significance used by researchers and the public worldwide.

General Information Product↗
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↗
USGS2021

A more representative community of ecologists

Ecologists play a crucial role in providing solutions to the challenges facing the world. For most of the history of the field, however, the science of ecology has been pursued by white men, and increasingly, by white women. This lack of diversity is untenable today, not only because it is socially unjust, but also because solving environmental problems requires diversity. Ecology as a science is an extremely rewarding and fun career choice for many, but how can the field recruit a more diverse workforce to do this important and gratifying work? Attracting and retaining future ecologists of color is the focus of this Forum. How do young people choose a career in ecology and environmental sciences? For many ecologists, environmental scientists and managers, and future natural resource professionals, an early field experience provides a crucial introduction and gateway. A sojourn at a field station, an extended field trip, or field expedition has introduced many of today’s professionals to their fields, but at the same time, a growing literature documents problematic behavior, discrimination, and other forms of harassment that have been far too frequently reported, and little attention has been given to conscious or implicit exclusion of students from diverse backgrounds. In their lead article, Bowser and Cid, two leading researchers and long-time champions of diversity in ecology, build on experience in long-running programs as well as the literature to diagnose challenges facing diverse youth, and present approaches to encourage, rather than discourage, further engagement. They describe affirmative and creative measures that foster a sense of inclusion and community among young scholars; this sense of belonging and empowerment allows many to advance to studies and careers in ecology and environmental science. In the subsequent six papers, authors explore topics either responding to, or inspired by, the lead paper. They explore alternatives to a field experience as a gateway to a career in ecology or environmental sciences through, for example, data science or the social sciences. Other comment papers describe challenges faced in the next phases of an academic career, barriers faced by specific cultural groups and the approaches, challenges, and outcomes of programs aiming to increase the diversity of the environmental STEM workforce. All responses sound a clarion call for change to hear and value different voices and perspectives to be heard and valued. These include (1) structural and cultural change to our institutions and reward structures; (2) developing and nurturing personal relationships among students and their mentors, within teams and in internships; (3) making entry to ecology inviting and making advancement in ecology free from systemic barriers; and (4) broadening our vision of ecology, and the ways we learn about the world’s ecosystems. The Ecological Society of America, the home for Ecological Applications , is committed to the diversity, equity and inclusion needed to tackle environmental challenges in unity (https://www.esa.org/esablog/2020/09/24/time-for-action-esa-initiates-a-diversity-equity-inclusion-and-justice-deij-task-force/). The world needs all available talent and perspectives to meet environmental challenges today. Ecological Applications has long published occasional papers on the profession of ecology and never ones more important or timely than these. The editorial team is proud to provide an outlet for the voices of our field, in all its current, if inadequate, diversity and honored to host the passionate and committed views of our authors.

Ecological Applications↗
USGS1999

Environmental issues associated with fossil fuel resources; an evaluation of research opportunities for the U.S. Geological Survey's Energy Resources Program

Fossil fuel consumption in the United States has nearly tripled within the last 50 years (fig. 1), and is expected to continue increasing. As our knowledge and awareness of environmental consequences related to fossil fuel extraction and use grow, we as a nation, face the challenge of balancing our energy requirements with a desire for environmentally cleaner fuel. To help meet this challenge, the Energy Resources Program (ERP) of the Geologic Division (GD), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) sponsored three internal workshops and a World Wide Web (WWW) workshop. The primary goal of these workshops was to identify those environmental issues that are related to fossil fuels, are national in scope, and are within the purview of the USGS as an earth-science government agency. Those issues so identified will be prioritized according to ERP's future research plan and according to the extent they provide an environmental framework for ERP's petroleum and coal assessments. The purpose of this paper is to provide the results of the internal and WWW workshops as proposed topics of research for future ERP work, delineate studies to answer the questions related to each proposed research area, and link the studies to the seven science goals of the Geologic Division. The information provided herein will be used in preparing the USGS Geologic Division's FY2000 prospectus and ERP's next five-year strategic plan. Acknowledgements. The authors wish to acknowledge information on ERP environmental projects provided by Les Magoon, Paul Lillis, Keith Kvenvolden, Tom Lorenson, and Bob Rosenbauer. Peter Schweitzer was instrumental in providing the software for the WWW workshop, Cheryl Adkisson for constructing the workshop web pages, and Laura Friedrich for constructing the web pages summarizing the internal workshops. Stan Mroczkowski, Jim Otton, Donna Read, and Dorothy Tanti provided notes of or logistical assistance for the internal workshops. This report reflects the collective input of numerous USGS managers and scientists their participation in the workshops is greatly appreciated.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2009

Sedimentation survey of Lago Guerrero, Aguadilla, Puerto Rico, March 2006

Lago Guerrero is located in Aguadilla, northwestern Puerto Rico (fig. 1). The reservoir has a surface area of about 32,000 square meters and is excavated in Aymamon Limestone of Miocene age. This bedrock consists of chalk interbed-ded with solution-riddled hard limestone (Monroe, 1969). The reservoir was constructed in the 1930s as part of the Isabela Hydroelectric System to regulate flows to two hydroelectric plants-Central Isabel No. 2, at an elevation of about 110 meters above mean sea level, and Central Isabel No. 3, at about 55 meters above mean sea level. Hydroelectric power generation was discontinued during the early 1960s, although the exact date is unknown (Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, written commun., 2007). The principal use of the reservoir since then has been to regulate flow to two public-supply water filtration plants and supply irrigation water for the Aguadilla area. Flow into the reservoir is derived from Lago Guajataca through a 26-kilometer-long Canal Principal de Diversion concrete canal (Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, written commun., 2001). Additional inflow occurs on an incidental basis only during intensive rainfall from the immediate drainage area. The present Lago Guerrero drainage area is undetermined, due to the irregular and complex topography of the limestone terrain and anthropogenic modifications to the stormwater drainage system. Stormwater runoff, however, is presumed to be negligible compared to the almost constant inflow to the reservoir of about 59,300 cubic meters per day from Lago Guajataca (CSA Group, 2000). On March 9, 2006, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Caribbean Water Science Center, in cooperation with the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (PREPA), conducted a bathymetric survey of Lago Guerrero to determine the storage capacity of the reservoir and sedimentation amount since a previous survey conducted on May 30, 2001. The March 2006 survey was made to develop a bathymetric map of the reservoir, establish baseline data for future reservoir capacity comparisons, and to estimate the average sedimentation rate over the preceding 5 years.

Puerto Rico↗
USGS2005

Maps of the United States

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) sells a variety of maps of the United States. Who needs these maps? Students, land planners, politicians, teachers, marketing specialists, delivery companies, authors and illustrators, attorneys, railroad enthusiasts, travelers, Government agencies, military recruiters, newspapers, map collectors, truckers, boaters, hikers, sales representatives, communication specialists. Everybody. Users of these maps range from a corporation planning a regional expansion or a national marketing campaign, to a person who wants a decoration to hang on the wall. If you are not sure which map best meets your needs, call the Earth Science Information Center for assistance.

General Information Product↗
USGS2025

Comparisons of shoreline positions from satellite-derived and traditional field- and remote-sensing techniques

Satellite-derived shorelines (SDS) have the potential to help researchers answer critical coastal science questions and support work to predict coastal change by filling in the spatial and temporal gaps present in current field-based and remote-sensing data collection methods. The U.S. Geological Survey conducted comparison analyses of traditionally sourced shorelines and SDS in diverse coastal landscapes to determine how SDS could be used in ongoing and future work across varied coastal environments and provided some initial findings that could be used for implementation. Using CoastSeg, a browser-based program for SDS detection and mapping, SDS for the period 1984–2023 for multiple locations across the United States were compared to shoreline positions from traditionally sourced shoreline data. In this report, the authors present these comparisons alongside lessons learned and challenges encountered when building SDS workflows in different coastal locations. Results show that individual SDS have larger uncertainty and yet produced similar linear trends to sparser, traditionally sourced shoreline data; because SDS methods provide orders of magnitude more data than traditional shoreline-detection methods, they can be used to evaluate shoreline behaviors. Refining average scalar slopes used in tidal corrections did not result in substantial decreases in uncertainty. Using lessons from this work to outline needs for regional implementation, initial setup time would be considerable, being on the order of weeks. However, once complete, shoreline detections and analyses are fast (on the order of minutes to hours) and achievable using a desktop computer.

Alaska, Florida, Massachusetts, Washington↗
USGS2022

Forecasting and communicating the dispersion and fallout of ash during volcanic eruptions: lessons from the September 20, 2020 eruptive pulse at Sangay volcano, Ecuador

Volcanic ash is a hazard to human health and activities. Accurate and timely forecasts coupled with effective communication about the dispersion and fallout of volcanic ash during explosive events are essential to reduce impacts on local communities and limit economic losses. In this study, we present the first detailed description of an eruptive pulse at Sangay volcano and its eruption source parameters. The eruptive pulse on September 20, 2020, started at about 9:20 UTC and lasted between 90 and 100 min, producing an eruptive column that rapidly separated into (1) a higher (15.2 km above sea level, asl), gas-rich cloud moving east-southeast and (2) a lower (12.2 km asl), ash-rich cloud moving west and causing ash fallout up to 280 km from the volcano. Field data collected immediately after the event allow estimating the volume of bulk tephra to be between 1.5 and 5.0 × 10 6 m 3 , corresponding to a volcanic explosivity index of 2. The eruptive pulse, identified as violent Strombolian, emitted andesitic ash that was more mafic than products ejected by Sangay volcano in recent decades. Component analysis and glass chemistry of juvenile particles support the hypothesis that this event excavated deeper into the upper conduit compared to typical Strombolian activity at Sangay volcano, while grain-size analysis allows reconstruction of the total grain-size distribution of the fallout deposit. The discrepancies between the ash fallout simulations performed with the Ash3D online tool and the actual deposit are mainly the result of inaccurate pre- and syn-eruptive configurations and highlight the importance of additional processes such as aggregation. Communication products issued during the event included (1) several standard short reports, (2) volcano observatory notices for aviation, (3) social media posts, and (4) a special report providing the results of the ash fallout simulation. Although communication was effective with the authorities and the connected population, an effort must be made to reach the most vulnerable isolated communities for future events. This study shows that forecasting ash dispersion and fallout during volcanic eruptions can guide early warnings and trigger humanitarian actions, and should become a standard in volcano observatories worldwide.

Sangay volcano↗
USGS2017

U.S. Geological Survey Karst Interest Group Proceedings, San Antonio, Texas, May 16–18, 2017

Introduction and Acknowledgments 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) and evaporites (gypsum, anhydrite, and halite) 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. These factors involve biological, chemical, and physical changes that when combined with the diverse climatic regimes in which karst development 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 have resulted in the most exceptional karst areas being designated as national or state parks. Tens of thousands of similar areas in the United States have been developed into commercial caverns and known privately owned caves. 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 form 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 due to dissolution features that form direct pathways into karst aquifers can impact the ecosystem and water quality associated with 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 Groundwater 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 with other federal and state agencies, and with researchers from academia and institutes. To accomplish its mission, the KIG has organized a series of workshops that have been held near nationally important karst areas. To date (2017) seven 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 areas. To increase non-USGS participation an effort was made for the workshops to be held at a university or institute beginning with the fourth workshop. Proceedings of the workshops are published by the USGS and are available online at the USGS publications warehouse https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/ by using the search term “karst interest group.” The first KIG workshop was held in St. Petersburg, Florida, in 2001, in the vicinity of the large springs and other karst features of the Floridan aquifer system. The second KIG workshop was held in 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 in 2005, in Rapid City, South Dakota, near evaporite karst features in limestones of the Madison Group in the Black Hills of South Dakota. The Rapid City KIG workshop included field trips to Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, and featured a presentation by Thomas Casadevall, then USGS Central Region Director, on the status of Earth science at the USGS. The fourth KIG workshop in 2008 was 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 led by Rickard Toomey and Rick Olsen, National Park Service. The fifth KIG workshop in 2011 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 in the southern Ozarks, and a keynote presentation on paleokarst in the United States was delivered by Art and Peggy Palmer. The sixth KIG workshop was hosted by the National Cave and Karst Research Institute (NCKRI) in 2014, in Carlsbad, New Mexico. George Veni, Director of the NCKRI, served as a co-chair of the workshop with Eve Kuniansky of the USGS. The workshop featured speaker Dr. Penelope Boston, Director of Cave and Karst Studies at New Mexico Tech, Socorro, and Academic Director at the NCKRI, who addressed the future of karst research. The field trip on evaporite karst of the lower Pecos Valley was led by Lewis Land (NCKRI karst hydrologist), and the field trip on the geology of Carlsbad Caverns National Park was led by George Veni. This current seventh KIG workshop is being held in San Antonio at the University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA). This 2017 workshop is being hosted by the Department of Geological Sciences’ Student Geological Society (SGS), and student chapters of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG) and Association of Engineering Geologists (AEG), with support by the UTSA Department of Geological Sciences and Center for Water Research. The UTSA student chapter presidents, Jose Silvestre (SGS), John Cooper (AAPG), and Tyler Mead (AEG) serve as co-chairs of the 2017 workshop with Eve Kuniansky of the USGS. The technical session committee is chaired by Eve Kuniansky, USGS, and includes Michael Bradley, Tom Byl, Rebecca Lambert, John Lane, and James Kaufmann, all USGS, and Patrick Tucci, retired USGS. The logistics committee includes Amy Clark, Yongli Gao, and Lance Lambert (Department Chair), UTSA Department of Geological Sciences; and Ryan Banta and Allan Clark, USGS, San Antonio, Texas. The field trip committee is chaired by Allan Clark and includes Amy Clark, Yongli Gao, and Keith Muehlestein, UTSA; Marcus Gary, Edwards Aquifer Authority and University of Texas at Austin; Ron Green, Southwest Research Institute; Geary Schindel, Edwards Aquifer Authority; and George Veni, NCKRI. Additionally, two organizations have assisted the UTSA student chapters in hosting the meeting by donating funds to the chapters: the Edwards Aquifer Authority, San Antonio, Texas, and the Barton Springs Edwards Aquifer Authority, Austin, Texas. Additionally, Yongli Gao, Center for Water Research and Department of Geological Sciences, UTSA, helped develop sessions on cave and karst research in China for this workshop. These proceedings could not have been accomplished without the assistance of Lawrence E. Spangler as co-editor who not only has subject matter expertise, but also serves as an editor with the USGS Science Publishing Network. We sincerely hope that this workshop continues to promote future collaboration among scientists of varied and diverse backgrounds, and improves our understanding of karst aquifer systems in the United States and its territories. The extended abstracts of USGS authors were peer reviewed and approved for publication by the USGS. 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 USGS editorial standards or stratigraphic nomenclature. However, all articles had a minimum of two peer reviews and were edited for consistency of appearance in the proceedings. The use of trade, firm or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. The USGS Water Availability and Use Science Program funded the publication costs of the proceedings.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2020

The next frontier: Making research more reproducible

Science and engineering rest on the concept of reproducibility. An important question for any study is: are the results reproducible? Can the results be recreated independently by other researchers or professionals? Research results need to be independently reproduced and validated before they are accepted as fact or theory. Across numerous fields like psychology, computer systems, and water resources there are problems to reproduce research results (Aarts et al. 2015; Collberg et al. 2014; Hutton et al. 2016; Stagge et al. 2019; Stodden et al. 2018). This editorial examines the challenges to reproduce research results and suggests community practices to overcome these challenges. Coordination is needed among the authors, journals, funders and institutions that produce, publish, and report research. Making research more reproducible will allow researchers, professionals, and students to more quickly understand and apply research in follow-on efforts and advance the field.

Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management↗
USGS1987

Water Resources Research Grant Program project descriptions, fiscal year 1987

This report contains information on the 34 new projects funded by the United States Geological Survey's Water Resources Research Grant Program in fiscal year 1987 and on 3 projects completed during the year. For the new projects, the report gives the grant number, project title, performing organization, principal investigator(s), and a project description that includes: (1) identification of water related problems and problem-solution approach (2) contribution to problem solution, (3) objectives, and (4) approach. The 34 projects include 12 in the area of groundwater quality problems, 12 in the science and technology of water quality management, 1 in climate variability and the hydrologic cycle, 4 in institutional change in water resources management, and 5 in surface water management. For the three completed projects, the report furnishes the grant number; project title; performing organization; principal investor(s); starting data; data of receipt of final report; and an abstract of the final report. Each project description provides the information needed to obtain a copy of the final report. The report contains tables showing: (1) proposals received according to area of research interest, (2) grant awards and funding according to area of research interest, (3) proposals received according to type of submitting organization, and (4) awards and funding according to type of organization. (Author's abstract)

Open-File Report↗
USGS2010

Strategic Science for Coral Ecosystems 2007-2011

Shallow and deep coral ecosystems are being imperiled by a combination of stressors. Climate change, unsustainable fishing practices, and disease are transforming coral communities at regional to global scales. At local levels, excessive amounts of sediments, nutrients, and contaminants are also impacting the many benefits that healthy coral ecosystems provide. This Plan, Strategic Science for Coral Ecosystems, describes the information needs of resource managers and summarizes current research being conducted by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists and partners. It outlines important research actions that need to be undertaken over the next five years to achieve more accurate forecasting of future conditions and develop more effective decision-support tools to adaptively manage coral ecosystems. The overarching outcome of this Plan, if fully implemented, would be in transferring relevant knowledge to decision-makers, enabling them to better protect and sustain coral ecosystem services. These services include sources of food, essential habitat for fisheries and protected species, protection of coastlines from wave damage and erosion, recreation, and cultural values for indigenous communities. The USGS has a long history of research and monitoring experience in studying ancient and living coral communities and serving many stakeholders. The research actions in this Plan build on the USGS legacy of conducting integrated multidisciplinary science to address complex environmental issues. This Plan is responsive to Federal legislation and authorities and a variety of external and internal drivers that include the President's Ocean Action Plan, the recommendations of the Coral Reef Task Force, the information needs of Bureaus in the Department of Interior, the USGS Bureau Science Strategy (USGS 2007) and the formal plans of several USGS Programs. To achieve this Plan's desired outcomes will require increased funding and more effective coordination and collaboration among USGS managers and scientists within a national and international framework of partnerships in coral ecosystem science.

Circular↗
USGS2011

Geophysical logging data from the Mills Gap Road area near Asheville, North Carolina

In September 2009, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) was requested to assist the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 4 Superfund Section in the development of a conceptual groundwater flow model in the area of the Mills Gap Road contaminant investigation near Asheville, North Carolina (Site ID A4P5) through an Interagency Grant and work authorization IAD DW number 14946085. The USGS approach included the application of established and state-of-the-science borehole geophysical tools and methods used to delineate and characterize fracture zones in the regolith-fractured bedrock groundwater system. Borehole geophysical logs were collected in eight wells in the Mills Gap Road project area from January through June 2010. These subsurface data were compared to local surface geologic mapping data collected by the North Carolina Geological Survey (NCGS) from January through May 2010.

North Carolina↗
USGS2008

Proceedings of the U.S. Geological Survey Seventh Biennial Geographic Information Science Workshop, Denver, Colorado, May 12-16, 2008

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Seventh Biennial Geographic Information Science (GIS) Workshop (USGS-GIS 2008) on May 12 through 16, 2008, at the Denver Federal Center in Denver, Colorado, is unique in that it brings together GIS professionals from all of the USGS disciplines across all regions, and focuses primarily on the needs and accomplishments of the USGS. The theme for the 2008 workshop, “GIS for Tomorrow’s Challenges,” provides an opportunity for USGS GIS professionals to demonstrate how they have responded to the challenges set forth in the USGS Science Strategy (http://www.usgs.gov/science_ strategy/). During this workshop, attendees will have an opportunity to present or demonstrate their work; develop their knowledge by attending hands-on workshops and presentations given by professionals from the USGS and other Federal agencies, GIS-related companies, and academia; and to network with other professionals to develop collaborative opportunities. In addition to participation in numerous workshops and presentations, attendees will have opportunities to listen to top-level managers from the USGS present updates and goals concerning the future of several USGS programs. Monday evening’s Star Guest presentation by Thomas Wagner, NSF Office of Polar Programs, and Paul Morin, Antarctic Geospatial Information Center, entitled “Mapping all that is White: Antarctic Science and Operations Viewed Though Geospatial Data,” will be one of many valuable presentations. This Proceedings volume will serve as an activity reference for workshop attendees, as well as an archive of technical abstracts presented at the workshop. Author, co-author, and presenter names, affiliations, and contact information are listed with presentation titles with the abstracts. Some hands-on sessions are offered twice; in these instances, abstracts submitted for publication are presented in the proceedings on both days on which they are offered. All acronyms used in these proceedings are explained in the text of each abstract.

Scientific Investigations Report↗