USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Surveying and Land Information Science”

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
USGS2022

Vegetation map for the Seboeis Unit of Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument

The Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument, located in the forests of central Maine, is a newly (2016) established unit for the National Park Service. To better understand the condition of lands within the monument and inform management planning, Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument resource managers wanted better information of the vegetation present within the monument. To meet this need, scientists at the U.S. Geological Survey Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center worked with ecologists at the Maine Natural Areas Program to catalog and map the vegetation of the Seboeis Unit of the monument. This report details this process, provides results of the survey and mapping efforts, presents results in the form of a vegetation map for the Seboeis Unit, and provides vegetation descriptions and a dichotomous key for the entire Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument.

Maine↗
USGS2018

Probabilistic mineral resource assessment of U.S. Territories of the Caribbean Basin and adjacent areas: Progress report

The U.S. Geological Survey is partnering with the IberoAmerican Association of Geological and Mining Surveys (ASGMI) to conduct an assessment of undiscovered metallic and non-metallic resources in the Greater Antilles region. The assessment plans to provide science-based information on the geologic availability of these resources for development, land-use planning, and decision making. The USGS anticipates contributing information generated for the Greater Antilles assessment project to the concurrent ASGMI project “Metallogenetic Map of Central America and the Caribbean”. ASGMI, in turn, anticipates contributing expertise on the metallogeny of the region to the USGS assessment project. For this purpose, the USGS plans to conduct a workshop on assessment methodology to support ASGMI’s participation in the probabilistic estimation of undiscovered deposits. Both projects stand to benefit significantly from this collaborative effort.

US Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico↗
USGS2020

Hydrologic monitoring networks in the Death Valley Regional Flow System, Nye County, Nevada and Inyo County, California

Introduction Water is an important resource in the arid southwest region of the United States where there is a limited supply of surface water and groundwater. In the Death Valley regional groundwater flow system (DVRFS) in southern Nevada and eastern California, groundwater is the main source of supply for agricultural, commercial, and domestic water needs. For over four decades, the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Nevada Water Science Center (NVWSC) has assisted environmental programs with the collection of hydrologic information within the DVRFS. Three hydrologic networks, managed in cooperation with local (Nye County, Nev., and Inyo County, Calif.) and federal (Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, U.S. Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration) agencies, are used to actively monitor wells and springs in the region.

California, Nevada↗
USGS2022

Potential effects of energy development on environmental resources of the Williston Basin in Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota

About this volume The Williston Basin, which includes parts of Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota in the United States, has been a leading domestic oil and gas producing area. To better understand the potential effects of energy development on environmental resources in the Williston Basin, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Bureau of Land Management, and in support of the needs identified by the Bakken Federal Executive Group (consisting of representatives from 13 Federal agencies and Tribal groups), began work to synthesize existing information on science topics to support management decisions related to energy development. This report is divided into four chapters (A–D). Chapter A provides an executive summary of the report and principal findings from chapters B–D. Chapter B provides a brief compilation of information regarding the history of energy development, physiography, climate, land use, demographics, and related studies in the Williston Basin. Chapter C synthesizes current information about water resources, identifies potential effects from energy development, and summarizes water resources research and information needs in the Williston Basin. Chapter D summarizes information about ecosystems, species of conservation concern, and potential effects to those species from energy development in the Williston Basin.

Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota↗
USGS2022

Documenting the multiple facets of a subsiding landscape from coastal cities and wetlands to the continental shelf

Land subsidence is a settling, sinking, or collapse of the land surface. In the southeastern United States, subsidence is frequently observed as sinkhole collapse in karst environments, wetland degradation and loss in coastal and other low-lying areas, and inundation of coastal urban communities. Human activities such as fluid extraction, mining, and overburden alteration can cause or exacerbate subsidence, which can result in damage to infrastructure and resources. Subsidence is a hazard that takes place throughout the United States; however, a systematic approach to recognize and develop informed responses to the drivers of subsidence has not yet been fully established. To address this problem, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Southeast Region (SER) funded the gathering of a team of interdisciplinary USGS scientists to promote scientific collaboration. Southeast Region scientists welcomed scientists from other regions (see table 1.1 in Appendix 1) in September 2018 at the St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center (SPCMSC) in Florida for the first workshop of the Subsidence Flex Team (SFT) (see Appendix 2 for agenda). The SFT set out to review subsidence-related research and technology and develop a unifying framework for describing the processes and hazards associated with land subsidence. A more comprehensive understanding of subsidence hazards could help to inform regional vulnerability assessments that would prove invaluable to the public, community developers, policy makers, and resource managers in both inland and coastal states. The SFT analyzed USGS strengths and weaknesses to identify existing infrastructure and capabilities that could be leveraged to create a comprehensive and far-reaching subsidence-monitoring and mitigation program. Over the course of the 2-day workshop, interdisciplinary understandings of the processes and hazards related to subsidence were explored through individual presentations and group discussion. With all perspectives considered, the SFT recommended that subsidence-related research develop scientific approaches and metrics by which the subsidence component can be isolated and quantified in order to protect both the environment and human infrastructure from harm.

Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi↗
USGS2004

Colorado Canyons National Conservation Area 2003 visitor use survey: Completion report

This report represents the analysis of research conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The purpose is to provide socio-economic and recreational use information that can be used in the development of a Resource Management Plan (RMP) for the Colorado Canyons National Conservation Area (CCNCA). The results reported here deal primarily with recreation-based activities in four areas: Kokopelli Loops, Rabbit Valley, Loma Boat Launch, and Devil’s Canyon. In the fall of 2002, researchers from the Policy Analysis and Science Assistance Program (PASA) of the Fort Collins Science Center (FORT) in the USGS met with the staff of the CCNCA to discuss the issues related to social, economic, and human dimensions of natural resource management related to the RMP. As a result, a research study was designed to investigate the recreational experiences of visitors and their attitudes toward the management of the conservation area. In the spring of 2003, PASA conducted an intercept survey of recreational users at the CCNCA and a mail survey of local residents who were actively involved in decision-making regarding recreation on public lands in Mesa County, Colorado. Two hundred and three (203) mail surveys (66%) were returned and all of them were completed in full and considered usable. The intercept survey had a response rate with a range from 56%–64% among the four sites that were surveyed. We developed a questionnaire (OMB Control Number: 1040-0001) to answer the following questions: What are the important differences in citizens’ attitudes regarding recreation at the CCNCA? What are the factors that explain the differences in attitudes and preferences regarding recreation management of the NCA? What are citizens’ attitudes and preferences regarding their attitudes about paying a fee to visit the CCNCA? In general, respondents at all sites reported having an excellent or good recreation experience and almost all indicated that they intended to return. The results from the intercept survey indicated that across four sites 1(Kokopelli Loops, Devil’s Canyon, Loma Boat Launch, and Rabbit Valley) respondents reported support for undeveloped use and recreation restrictions to limit resource impacts. Respondents indicated that managing sites for undeveloped use was a good idea. The respondents from the mail survey generally had a positive orientation toward current management practices of the CCNCA. According to our surveys, non-motorized trail related activities were among the three most popular activities people engaged in both close to home and while away. These trail-based recreational activities included walking, running, mountain bike riding, and horseback riding. Research has shown that people participate in these activities for many reasons including learning about nature, exercising, to learning about paleontology, escaping for awhile, and socializing with family and friends (Taylor, 2000). National data indicate that larger percentages of the general American population engage in trail activities than in many other traditional outdoor activities (Cordell, 1999). Over 65% of people in the U.S. engage in walking as a recreational activity (Figure 1). We found that people wanted to experience the outdoors and the CCNCA provided a good place to do it. Trail activities are often those that people participate in on a regular basis as a way to exercise. This can make trail related activities more attractive from a management standpoint because people who participate in an activity may be more likely to be repeat visitors.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1985

Water-resources activities of the U.S. Geological Survey in Texas; fiscal years 1982-84

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) was established by an act of Congress on March 3, 1879, to provide a permanent Federal agency to conduct the systematic and scientific classification of the public lands, and examination of the geological structure, mineral resources, and products of national domain. An integral part of that original mission includes publishing and disseminating the earth-science information needed to understand, to plan the use of, and to manage the Nation's energy, land, mineral, and water resources. Since 1879, the research and fact-finding role of the USGS has grown and been modified to meet the changing needs of the Nation it serves. As part of that evolution, the USGS has become the Federal Government's largest earth-science research agency, the Nation's largest civilian mapmaking agency, the primary source of data on the Nation's surface- and ground-water resources, and the employer of the largest number of professional earth scientists. Today's programs serve a diversity of needs and users. Programs include: Conducting detailed assessments of the energy and mineral potential of the Nation's land and offshore areas. Investigating and issuing warnings of earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, landslides, and other geologic and hydrologic hazards. Conducting research on the geologic structure of the Nation. Studying the geologic features, structure, processes, and history of the other planets of our solar system. Conducting topographic surveys of the Nation and preparing topographic and thematic maps and related cartographic products. Developing and producing digital cartographic data bases and products. Collecting data on a routine basis to determine the quantity, quality, and use of surface and ground water. Conducting water-resources appraisals in order to describe the consequences of alternative plans for developing land and water resources. Conducting research in hydraulics and hydrology and coordinating all Federal water-data acquisition. Using remotely sensed data to develop new cartographic, geologic, and hydrologic research techniques for natural resources planning and management. Providing earth-science information through an extensive publications program and a network of public access points. Along with its continuing commitment to meet the growing and changing earthscience information needs of the Nation, the USGS remains dedicated to its original mission to collect, analyze, interpret, publish, and disseminate information about the natural resources of the Nation providing "earth science in the public service."

Open-File Report↗
USGS2006

Development of land segmentation, stream-reach network, and watersheds in support of hydrological simulation program: Fortran (HSPF) modeling, Chesapeake Bay watershed, and adjacent parts of Maryland, Delaware, and Virginia

The U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin, Maryland Department of the Environment, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, and the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science are collaborating on the Chesapeake Bay Regional Watershed Model, using Hydrological Simulation Program - FORTRAN to simulate streamflow and concentrations and loads of nutrients and sediment to Chesapeake Bay. The model will be used to provide information for resource managers. In order to establish a framework for model simulation, digital spatial datasets were created defining the discretization of the model region (including the Chesapeake Bay watershed, as well as the adjacent parts of Maryland, Delaware, and Virginia outside the watershed) into land segments, a stream-reach network, and associated watersheds. Land segmentation was based on county boundaries represented by a 1:100,000-scale digital dataset. Fifty of the 254 counties and incorporated cities in the model region were divided on the basis of physiography and topography, producing a total of 309 land segments. The stream-reach network for the Chesapeake Bay watershed part of the model region was based on the U.S. Geological Survey Chesapeake Bay SPARROW (SPAtially Referenced Regressions On Watershed attributes) model stream-reach network. Because that network was created only for the Chesapeake Bay watershed, the rest of the model region uses a 1:500,000-scale stream-reach network. Streams with mean annual streamflow of less than 100 cubic feet per second were excluded based on attributes from the dataset. Additional changes were made to enhance the data and to allow for inclusion of stream reaches with monitoring data that were not part of the original network. Thirty-meter-resolution Digital Elevation Model data were used to delineate watersheds for each stream reach. State watershed boundaries replaced the Digital Elevation Model-derived watersheds where coincident. After a number of corrections, the watersheds were coded to indicate major and minor basin, mean annual streamflow, and each watershed's unique identifier as well as that of the downstream watershed. Land segments and watersheds were intersected to create land-watershed segments for the model.

Delaware, Maryland, Virginia↗
USGS2005

Yellowstone grizzly bear investigations: Annual report of the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team, 2004

The contents of this Annual Report summarize results of monitoring and research from the 2004 field season. The report also contains a summary of nuisance grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos horribilis ) management actions. The study team continues to work on issues associated with counts of unduplicated females with cubs-of-the-year (COY). These counts are used to establish a minimum population size, which is then used to establish mortality thresholds for the Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 1993). A computer program that defines the rule set used by Knight et al. (1995) to differentiate unique family groups was completed in spring 2005. We will use an improved version of this model to verify the accuracy of the rules using known bears and their telemetry locations in test runs. We hope to have this work complete by the end of 2005. The grizzly bear recovery plan (USFWS 1993) established mortality quotas at 4% of the minimum population estimate derived from female with COY data and no more than 30% of the 4% (1.2%) could be female bears. Simulation modeling (Harris 1984) established sustainable mortality at around 6% of the population. We used the latest information on reproduction and survival to estimate population trajectory in the same simulation model originally used by Harris. A Wildlife Monograph has been accepted for publication and should be available by summer 2005. Our project addressing the potential application of stable isotopes and trace elements to quantify consumption rates of whitebark pine ( Pinus albicaulis ) and cutthroat trout ( Oncorhynchus clarki ) by grizzly bears was completed. Our manuscript on consumption rates of whitebark pine has been published (Canadian Journal of Zoology 81:763-770). The manuscript on fish consumption rates was also accepted and is published in the Canadian Journal of Zoology 82:493-501. Both can be found on the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team (IGBST) website http://www.nrmsc.usgs.gov/research/igbst-home.htm. We began a new study in Grand Teton National Park evaluating habitat use both temporally and spatially between grizzly and black ( Ursus americanus ) bears. We will employ a new form of Global Positioning System (GPS) technology that incorporates a spread spectrum communication system. Spread spectrum allows for transfer of stored GPS locations from the collar to a remote receiving station. Results of our first yea r’s field season are summarized in this report. Whitebark pine (WBP) has been identified as one of the import ant fall foods of the Yellowstone grizzly bear. Previous efforts to map the distribution of WBP were for the Cumulative Effects Model. Consequently the only coverage of WBP distribution was for the grizzly bear Recovery Zone. We were successful in getting financial support through the U.S. Geological Survey Land Remote Sensing Program and Interdisciplinary Science Support Activities Project to create an ecosystem-wide map of the distribution of WBP. The results of that project are reported in Appendix A. The study team annually estimates WBP cone production on a series of transects. That information is reported annually in our reports. Concern over the long-term health of WBP prompted us to investigate the usefulness of cone counts as an indirect index of WBP health. Results of this analysis (Appendix B) indicated that cone production is too variable to serve this purpose. Consequently, we partnered with several 2 other agencies and embarked on a program to develop a long-term monitoring program directed specifically at WBP health in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE). Our team (Greater Yellowstone Whitebark Pine Monitoring Working Group) was successful in obtaining funds to develop and implement a WBP health monitoring program. Results of our first years work are presented in Appendix C. We also successfully competed for funds in 2005 and will continue to collect information on WBP health. Army cutworm moths ( Euxoa auxiliaris ) are also a very important food for a segment of the GYE grizzly bear population. Hillary Robison, graduate student at University of Nevada, Reno, is nearing completion of her program. In this report, we post her annual work summary, and abstracts of her most recently submitted publications. These include one on the levels of pesticides in cutworm moths and their potential affect on grizzly bears (Appendix D), a spatial analysis to identify army cutworm moth habitat (Appendix E), and the results of a preliminary analysis of pollen grains on the mouth parts of moths (Appendix F) to help identify which plant species are commonly fed upon. Other study team members have also been working on various aspects of grizzly bear science. Study team member Kerry Gunther hosted a workshop on habituated grizzly bears in North America. A copy of the abstract of that report can be found in Appendix G. Additionally, Kerry Gunther and Doug Smith, wolf researcher in Yellowstone National Park (YNP), reported on the interactions between gray wolves ( Canis lupus ) and female grizzly bears with young. They report that of 15 interactions between these 2 carnivores, 8 involve d females with COY. They observed 2 incidents where cubs were killed by wolves at ungulate carcasses (Appendix H). The annual reports of the IGBST summarize annual data collection. Because additional information can be obtained after publication, data summaries are subject to change. For that reason, data analyses and summaries presented in this report supersede all previously published data. The study area and sampling techniques are reported by Blanchard (1985), Mattson et al. (1991 a ), and Haroldson et al. (1998).

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming↗
USGS2020

Forecasting for a fractured land: A case study of the communication and use of aftershock forecasts from the Mw 7.8 2016 Kaikōura earthquake in Aotearoa New Zealand

Operational earthquake forecasts (OEFs) are represented as time‐dependent probabilities of future earthquake hazard and risk. These probabilities can be presented in a variety of formats, including tables, maps, and text‐based scenarios. In countries such as Aotearoa New Zealand, the U.S., and Japan, OEFs have been released by scientific organizations to agencies and the public, with the intent of providing information about future earthquake hazard and risk, so that people can use this information to inform their decisions and activities. Despite questions being raised about the utility of OEF for decision‐making, past earthquake events have shown that agencies and the public have indeed made use of such forecasts. Responses have included making decisions about safe access into buildings, cordoning, demolition safety, timing of infrastructure repair and rebuild, insurance, postearthquake building standards, postevent land‐use planning, and public communication about aftershocks. To add to this body of knowledge, we undertook a survey to investigate how agencies and GNS Science staff used OEFs that were communicated following the M w 7.8 2016 Kaikōura earthquake in Aotearoa New Zealand. We found that agencies utilized OEFs in many of the ways listed previously, and we document individual employee’s actions taken in their home‐life context. Challenges remain, however, regarding the interpretation of probabilistic information and applying this to practical decision‐making. We suggest that science agencies cannot expect nontechnical users to understand and utilize forecasts without additional support. This might include developing a diversity of audience‐relevant OEF information for communication purposes, alongside advice on how such information could be utilized.

northern part of South Island↗
USGS2010

Archiving strategy for USGS EROS center and our future direction

The U. S. Geological Survey's Earth Resources Observation and Science Center has the responsibility to acquire, manage, and preserve our Nation's land observations. These records are obtained primarily from airplanes and satellites dating back to the 1930s. The ability to compare landscapes from the past with current information enables change analysis at local and global scales. With new observations added daily, the records management challenges are daunting, involving petabytes of electronic data and tens of thousands of rolls of analog film. This paper focuses upon the appraisal and preservation functions employed to ensure that these records are available for current and future generations.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2013

U.S. Geological Survey ecosystems science strategy—Advancing discovery and application through collaboration

Executive Summary Ecosystem science is critical to making informed decisions about natural resources that can sustain our Nation’s economic and environmental well-being. Resource managers and policymakers are faced with countless decisions each year at local, regional, and national levels on issues as diverse as renewable and nonrenewable energy development, agriculture, forestry, water supply, and resource allocations at the urban-rural interface. The urgency for sound decisionmaking is increasing dramatically as the world is being transformed at an unprecedented pace and in uncertain directions. Environmental changes are associated with natural hazards, greenhouse gas emissions, and increasing demands for water, land, food, energy, mineral, and living resources. At risk is the Nation’s environmental capital, the goods and services provided by resilient ecosystems that are vital to the health and wellbeing of human societies. Ecosystem science—the study of systems of organisms interacting with their environment and the consequences of natural and human-induced change on these systems—is necessary to inform decisionmakers as they develop policies to adapt to these changes. This Ecosystems Science Strategy is built on a framework that includes basic and applied science. It highlights the critical roles that U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists and partners can play in building scientific understanding and providing timely information to decisionmakers. The strategy underscores the connection between scientific discoveries and the application of new knowledge, and it integrates ecosystem science and decisionmaking, producing new scientific outcomes to assist resource managers and providing public benefits. We envision the USGS as a leader in integrating scientific information into decisionmaking processes that affect the Nation’s natural resources and human well-being. The USGS is uniquely positioned to play a pivotal role in ecosystem science. With its wide range of expertise, the Bureau can bring holistic, cross-scale, interdisciplinary capabilities to the design and conduct of monitoring, research, and modeling and to new technologies for data collection, management, and visualization. Collectively, these capabilities can be used to reveal ecological patterns and processes, explain how and why ecosystems change, and forecast change over different spatial and temporal scales. USGS science can provide managers with options and decision-support tools to use resources sustainably. The USGS has long-standing, collaborative relationships with the Department of the Interior (DOI) and other partners in the natural sciences, in both conducting science and applying the results. The USGS engages these partners in cooperative investigations that otherwise would lack the necessary support or be too expensive for a single bureau to conduct. The heart of this strategy is a framework for USGS ecosystems science that focuses on five long-term goals, which are seen as interconnected components that reinforce our vision of the USGS providing science that is at the forefront of decisionmaking: Improve understanding of ecosystem structure, function, and processes. The focus for this goal is an understanding of how ecosystems work, including the dynamics of species, their populations, interactions, and genetics, and how they change across spatial and temporal scales. Advance understanding of how drivers influence ecosystem change. The challenges here are explaining the drivers of ecosystem change, their spatio-temporal patterns, their uncertainties and interactions, and their influence on ecosystem processes and dynamics. Improve understanding of the services that ecosystems provide to society. Here the emphasis is on the measurement of environmental capital and ecosystem services, and the identification of sources and patterns of change in space and time. Develop tools, technologies, and capacities to inform decisionmaking about ecosystems. This includes developing new technologies and approaches for conducting applications-oriented ecosystem science. A principal challenge will be how to quantify uncertainty and incorporate it in decision analysis. Apply science to enhance strategies for management, conservation, and restoration of ecosystems. These challenges include development of novel approaches to monitoring, assessment, and restoration of ecosystems; new methods to address species of concern and communities at risk; and innovations in decision analysis and support to address imminent ecosystem changes or those that are underway. Closely integrated with the five goals are four strategic approaches that provide the path forward for the USGS Ecosystems Mission Area. These approaches cross-cut all of the goals and are seen as essential to the implementation of this strategy: Assess information needs for ecosystem science through enhanced partnerships. Work with the DOI and other agencies and institutions to identify, design, and implement priority decision-driven ecological research. Promote the use of interdisciplinary ecosystem science. Design and conduct interdisciplinary process-oriented research in ecosystem science. Enhance modeling and forecasting. Build models to forecast ecosystem change, assess future management scenarios, and reduce uncertainties through an adaptive learning process. Support decisionmaking. Use quantitative approaches to assess the vulnerabilities of ecosystems, habitats, and species, and evaluate strategies for adaptation, restoration, and sustainable management. Following the four strategic approaches are a set of proposed actions that represent a sampling of specific USGS activities that align with this strategy and that address the Nation’s most pressing environmental needs. The strategy emphasizes coordination of activities across the USGS mission areas pursuant to these goals. Ecosystem science is inherently interdisciplinary and requires a broad perspective that incorporates the biological and physical sciences, climate science, information technology, and scientific capacity in mission areas across the Bureau. With its emphasis on coordination, this strategy can provide a critical underpinning for integrated science efforts with scientists from multiple mission areas of the USGS working together. Of course, the USGS will continue to conduct discipline-specific and interdisciplinary investigations, and both will continue to be vital parts of the ecosystem science portfolio. Finally, the strategy stresses the importance of coordination with other Federal agencies and organizations in the natural resources community. The USGS collaborates with resource agencies in the DOI and other organizations throughout the world to meet societal needs for species and ecosystem management. Working with these agencies and organizations, the USGS will play a key role in guiding sound decisionmaking during the next decade by advancing the scientific foundation for sustaining the natural resources that diverse, productive, resilient ecosystems provide.

Circular↗
USGS2010

Western Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center--providing comprehensive earth science for complex societal issues

Minerals in the environment and products manufactured from mineral materials are all around us and we use and come into contact with them every day. They impact our way of life and the health of all that lives. Minerals are critical to the Nation's economy and knowing where future mineral resources will come from is important for sustaining the Nation's economy and national security. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Mineral Resources Program (MRP) provides scientific information for objective resource assessments and unbiased research results on mineral resource potential, production and consumption statistics, as well as environmental consequences of mining. The MRP conducts this research to provide information needed for land planners and decisionmakers about where mineral commodities are known and suspected in the earth's crust and about the environmental consequences of extracting those commodities. As part of the MRP scientists of the Western Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center (WMERSC or 'Center' herein) coordinate the development of national, geologic, geochemical, geophysical, and mineral-resource databases and the migration of existing databases to standard models and formats that are available to both internal and external users. The unique expertise developed by Center scientists over many decades in response to mineral-resource-related issues is now in great demand to support applications such as public health research and remediation of environmental hazards that result from mining and mining-related activities. Western Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center Results of WMERSC research provide timely and unbiased analyses of minerals and inorganic materials to (1) improve stewardship of public lands and resources; (2) support national and international economic and security policies; (3) sustain prosperity and improve our quality of life; and (4) protect and improve public health, safety, and environmental quality. The MRP supports approximately 40 USGS research specialists who utilize cooperative agreements with universities, industry, and other governmental agencies to support their collaborative research and information exchange. Scientists of the WMERSC study how and where non-fuel mineral resources form and are concentrated in the earth's crust, where mineral resources might be found in the future, and how mineral materials interact with the environment to affect human and ecosystem health. Natural systems (ecosystems) are complex - our understanding of how ecosystems operate requires collecting and synthesizing large amounts of geologic, geochemical, biologic, hydrologic, and meteorological information. Scientists in the Center strive to understand the interplay of various processes and how they affect the structure, composition, and health of ecosystems. Such understanding, which is then summarized in publicly available reports, is used to address and solve a wide variety of issues that are important to society and the economy. WMERSC scientists have extensive national and international experience in these scientific specialties and capabilities - they have collaborated with many Federal, State, and local agencies; with various private sector organizations; as well as with foreign countries and organizations. Nearly every scientific and societal challenge requires a different combination of scientific skills and capabilities. With their breadth of scientific specialties and capabilities, the scientists of the WMERSC can provide scientifically sound approaches to a wide range of societal challenges and issues. The following sections describe examples of important issues that have been addressed by scientists in the Center, the methods employed, and the relevant conclusions. New directions are inevitable as societal needs change over time. Scientists of the WMERSC have a diverse set of skills and capabilities and are proficient in the collection and integration of

Circular↗
USGS2019

U.S. Geological Survey sagebrush ecosystem research annual report for 2019

The sagebrush ( Artemisia spp.) ecosystem extends across a large portion of the Western United States. Affected by multiple stressors, including interactions among fire, exotic plant invasions, and human land uses, this ecosystem has experienced significant loss, fragmentation, and degradation of landscapes once dominated by sagebrush. In turn, wildlife populations have declined following these deleterious conditions. Federal, State, local, and Tribal agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and industry have been galvanized by declining wildlife populations to implement management actions to confront the impacts of these stressors and insure the long-term availability of the sagebrush ecosystem for the broad range of uses critical to stakeholders in the Western United States. The sagebrush ecosystem provides habitat for over 350 species of plants and animals that are dependent on sagebrush for all or part of their annual life history. The greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ) stands out as the iconic species. Sage-grouse populations occur in 11 States and require relatively large expanses of sagebrush-dominated habitat to meet all their seasonal habitat needs. Recent management actions to conserve and maintain the sagebrush ecosystem have focused on the protection and restoration of sage-grouse habitat. However, each of the 350 species has a unique life history and differing area requirements (for example, large areas for Mule deer [ Odocoileus hemionus ] and small areas for pygmy rabbit [ Brachylagus idahoensis ]), and some species, such as migratory birds, only rely the sagebrush ecosystem for part of the year (for example, Brewer’s sparrow [ Spizella breweri ]). The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has a broad research program focused on the sagebrush ecosystem and these species and their response to stressors and management actions. The research is tailored specifically to inform and improve strategies for maintaining existing areas of intact sagebrush and restoring degraded landscapes. By providing the science to inform these strategies, the USGS is assisting land and resource managers at the Federal, State, Tribal, and local levels working towards sustainable wildlife populations and restored landscapes. The USGS provides a foundation of scientific information for use in major land and resource management decisions in the sagebrush ecosystem. These have included such actions as the preclusion of the need to list the greater sage-grouse under the Endangered Species Act and recent revisions to Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service resource management plans. The USGS continues to build on that foundation to inform science-based decisions within the U.S. Department of the Interior and other Federal, State, and local agencies and their continued conservation, management, and restoration of the sagebrush ecosystem to help support local economies.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New↗
USGS2002

Crustal structure of the coastal and marine San Francisco Bay region, California

As of the time of this writing, the San Francisco Bay region is home to about 6.8 million people, ranking fifth among population centers in the United States. Most of these people live on the coastal lands along San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento River delta, and the Pacific coast. The region straddles the tectonic boundary between the Pacific and North American Plates and is crossed by several strands of the San Andreas Fault system. These faults, which are stressed by about 4 cm of relative plate motion each year, pose an obvious seismic hazard. We have many ways to study earthquake faults. Where faults break the land surface, we may learn valuable information needed for hazard assessment, such as cumulative offset, slip rate, and earthquake history. However, many of the major faults in the region are partly submerged beneath San Francisco and Monterey Bays. Although this situation poses problems in gathering observational data for hazard assessment, bay-region waterways provide an opportunity to study faultzone structure by using marine subsurface-imaging techniques, which are easier and cheaper than equivalent studies on land. In 1993, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) launched a 5-year project aimed at unearthing the basic science of the submerged San Andreas strike-slip fault system in the San Francisco Bay region with its many interacting strands. Primary project goals were structural, such as to discover how the San Andreas and Hayward Faults are connected or related at depth, to learn how the complex of faults in the San Andreas stepover zone on the Golden Gate platform functions, and to locate previously unknown faults. This volume thus contains mostly structural information about the San Francisco Bay region, much of it gathered through exploratory geophysical experiments. The volume is organized “top down,” from studies in the shallowest crust to the base of the crust. The first three chapters are linked through their use of novel geophysical techniques to study earthquake effects, coseismic slip, and shallow stratigraphy. Kayen and others examine crustal structure at very high resolution and demonstrate the use of ground-penetrating-radar tomography to measure the liquefaction potential of coastal sedimentary deposits. McGann and others use microfossils from drill cores along the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge to determine a more detailed late Pleistocene stratigraphy of San Francisco Bay than was previously available. Geist and Zoback use the historical record of a small local tsunami generated by the great 1906 San Francisco earthquake to model the rupture process of that earthquake. The last four chapters are dedicated to studies of fault related structure of the seismogenic crust in and around the San Andreas Fault system in the San Francisco Bay region. Jachens and others compile an aeromagnetic anomaly map from new high-resolution flights across the bay region. Some of these anomalies mark the positions of offshore faults, and others are offset by faults, providing constraints on cumulative slip. Hart and others concisely summarize the marine seismic data recorded in and around San Francisco Bay, map the coverage, and provide archival information for those interested in acquiring data. The last two chapters present the results of the seismic data that have been analyzed. Bruns and others present their analysis of high-quality intermediate-resolution (~5-km penetration) seismic-reflection data gathered over the complex San Andreas-San Gregorio Fault junction. This junction, which is thought to be where the 1906 San Francisco earthquake originated (see Geist and Zoback, this volume), contains an apparent extensional right stepover in the San Andreas Fault. Finally, Parsons and others review and summarize the results of deep-crustal seismic-reflection experiments and local-earthquake tomographic studies, including previously unpublished data, and provide additional support and discussion for already-published studies. In summary, these studies were carried out in an environment where background information on faults in the San Francisco Bay region was sought. Much of the structural information presented here comes from experiments of a style unlikely to be conducted by the USGS in the near future. Together, the chapters in this volume provide a structural framework for a major part of a complex strike-slip fault system.

California↗
USGS2023

Synthesis of climate and ecological science to support grassland management priorities in the North Central Region

Grasslands in the Great Plains are of ecological, economic, and cultural importance in the United States. In response to a need to understand how climate change and variability will impact grassland ecosystems and their management in the 21st century, the U.S. Geological Survey North Central Climate Adaptation Science Center led a synthesis of peer-reviewed climate and ecology literature relevant to grassland management in the North Central Region (including Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas). This synthesis was done to begin to address grassland managers’ information needs and identify research gaps. This open-file report summarizes the impacts of climate change and variability on temperature, water availability, wildfire, vegetation, wildlife, large-bodied ruminants, grazing, and land-use change and the implications for grassland management in the North Central region. This open-file report also identifies areas in which further research is needed. U.S. Geological Survey funded this project.

Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota,↗
USGS2005

Geography for a Changing World - A science strategy for the geographic research of the U.S. Geological Survey, 2005-2015

This report presents a science strategy for the geographic research of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the years 2005-2015. The common thread running through the vision, mission, and science goals presented in the plan is that USGS geographers will provide national leadership to understand coupled human-environmental systems in the face of land change and will deliver pertinent information to decisionmakers on the vulnerability and resilience of these systems. We define land change science as the study of the human and environment dynamics that give rise to changed land use, cover, and surface form. A number of realities shape the strategic context of this plan: The Department of Interior Strategic Plan focuses on meeting society’s resource needs and sustaining the Nation’s life support systems, underscoring the importance of characterizing and understanding coupled human-environmental systems. In redefining its mission in the mid-1990s, the USGS envisions itself as an integrated natural science and information agency. The USGS will assume a national leadership role in the use of science to develop knowledge about the web of relations that couple biophysical and human systems and translate this knowledge into unbiased, reliable information that meets important societal information needs. The following trends will influence USGS geography-oriented science activities over the next decade. Most of the emerging earth science issues that the USGS will address are geographic phenomena. A growing international concern for aligning society’s development activities with environmental limits has led to an articulation of a science agenda associated with global environmental change, vulnerability, and resilience. Earth science investigations have evolved toward the study of very large areas, and the resulting huge volumes of data are challenging to manage and understand. Finally, scientists and the public face the challenge of gaining intelligent insights about geographic and environmental processes from these data, with the ultimate goal of guiding resource-management decisions. The first four science goals in the plan support understanding the human and environmental dynamics of land change. Each science goal has an associated set of strategic actions to achieve the goal. These goals and actions are consistent with national science priorities and the Department of Interior and USGS missions, take advantage of existing expertise, and lead to the strengthening of critical geographic research capacities that do not exist in other USGS disciplines.

Circular↗
USGS2015

Internships, employment opportunities, and research grants

As an unbiased, multidisciplinary science organization, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is dedicated to the timely, relevant, and impartial study of the health of our ecosystems and environment, our natural resources, the impacts of climate and land-use change, and the natural hazards that threaten us. Opportunities for undergraduate and graduate students and faculty to participate in USGS science are available in the selected programs described below. Please note: U.S. citizenship is required for all government positions. This publication has been superseded by USGS General Information Product 165 Grant Opportunities for Academic Research and Training and USGS General Information Product 166 Student and Recent Graduate Employment Opportunities . This publication is proceeded by USGS General Information Product 80 Internships, Employment Opportunities, and Research Grants published in 2008.

General Information Product↗