USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Conservation and resource management.”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 973 records · Page 54Linked to original sources

Selected effects of the Conservation Reserve Program on program participants: A report to survey respondents

The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) established under the 1985 Food Security Act was initially designed to provide the agricultural community economic assistance while protecting highly erodible cropland. Many of the environmental benefits to soil, water, and wildlife resources have been documented (Dunn and others, 1993; Ryan and others, 1998; Flather and others, 1999; Heard and others, 2000). However, the personal and social effects of the program on CRP participants (or contractees) had not been formally documented. Information had been limited to anecdotal comments from individual participants, such as: “since establishment of the CRP the streams have surface water in them” or “the CRP grasses capture drifting snow, making winter feeding of cattle easier.” The Farm Service Agency (FSA) and Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) wanted to have a better picture of the strengths and weaknesses of the program, according to those most affected by it. In addition, policy makers wanted to get input from program participants on the growing emphasis of the program on long-term management and wildlife habitat requirements. As a result, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) was asked to survey CRP contractees on these issues. Preliminary results from this study have been furnished to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and are being considered as new conservation and management policies for the CRP are being developed (as part of the recently passed Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002). This report includes preliminary results of the study and is being sent to survey respondents. A formal publication of survey results is also being prepared and should be completed by the winter of 2002.

Open-File Report↗

Streamflow, water quality, and energy development characteristics and water-quality trends for selected sites in the Green River and Muddy Creek drainage basins, southwestern Wyoming, water years 2006–16

Energy resource development in southwestern Wyoming has been rapidly expanding since the early 2000s to include innovative technologies for extracting oil and gas and enhancing renewable energy. In response to concerns about the potential negative effects of energy development on natural resources, the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative was created to implement a long-term, science-based program of assessing, conserving, and enhancing fish and wildlife habitats while facilitating responsible energy development through local collaborations and partnerships. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Bureau of Land Management, began monitoring streamflow and water quality as part of this initiative in 2006 at four U.S. Geological Survey streamgages within the Green River and Muddy Creek drainage basins to characterize the effects of energy development on streamflow and water quality in these areas. To quantify changes in water quality metrics, trend analyses for the 2006–16 water years were calculated and related to drainage basin characteristics including energy development (wells per square mile). Effects of energy development on water quality varied by watershed and the variability was driven primarily by the runoff efficiency and the geochemistry of the drainage basin. The New Fork River water chemistry was a calcium-bicarbonate type with low ionic strength and showed no statistically significant trends in water quality despite increased energy development. The Green River experienced moderate energy development, with significant upward trends in magnesium and alkalinity, indicating low sensitivity to development. Muddy Creek near Dad had minimal energy development and complex hydrogeochemical characteristics, showing mixed trends in water quality constituents. Muddy Creek near Baggs experienced moderate energy development, with significant upward trends in several water quality indicators indicating a response to the land disturbance associated with development. Overall, geochemistry and runoff efficiency influenced the vulnerability of water quality to energy development activities, highlighting the importance of drainage basin physical characteristics on vulnerability to development.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

The Aleutian-Bering Climate Vulnerability Assessment

Recent efforts to develop downscaled climate projections for the Bering Sea and Aleutians created an opportunity to better assess regional vulnerability to climate change. The Aleutian Bering Climate Vulnerability Assessment (ABCVA) was launched in 2014 to bring together regional science expertise and stakeholder interests in a rapid evaluation of the implications of future climate projections. This effort followed an internationally accepted but flexible pathway to develop practical, priority research topics that address ecosystem and community vulnerabilities. The ABCVA was completed as a partnership between the Aleutian and Bering Sea Islands Landscape Conservation Cooperative (ABSI LCC), the Alaska Climate Science Center and the Alaska Ocean Observing System (AOOS), and ultimately brought together three linked objectives: 1. identify and assess selected climate vulnerabilities of key resources and ecosystem services in the Aleutian Islands and Bering Sea region 2. broadly engage managers and stakeholders about the implications of climate vulnerabilities in the region 3. help ABSI LCC and the Alaska Climate Science Center and AOOS prioritize future research investments and focus The ABCVA convened a group of 30 researchers with expertise ranging from anthropology to zooplankton to review climate projections and their implications for the Aleutians and Bering Sea. These experts worked in five topic-based teams to assess vulnerabilities of species and ecosystem services relative. Each team identified initial vulnerabilities and made recommendations for further research that would help managers and communities better understand the implications of the changing climate in this region.

Aleutian and Bering Sea Islands↗

Imperiled mammalian fauna of aquatic ecosystems in the Southeast: A management perspective

Management of imperiled mammals associated with aquatic ecosystems in the southeastern United States ranges from almost no management for some species to intensive, high-profile programs for others. Aquatic mammals are notoriously difficult to census because they are often secretive, trap-wary, relatively rare, or have extensive movement patterns. As a result, conservation efforts aimed at these animals often have been greatly hampered by a general lack of comprehensive population data. Historically, certain high-profile, "flagship" species have been the primary beneficiaries of management efforts. One of the earliest examples involves beaver, Castor canadensis , which had been reduced to a low ebb due to unregulated harvest and were subsequently live-trapped by state game officials in the 1940s and repatriated throughout the southeastern states. The success of this restocking program has exceeded expectations, and today beaver numbers have reached what many consider to be nuisance proportions in most states. Similar restocking stories can be told for muskrats ( Ondatra zibethicus ) and, to a limited extent, for river otters ( Lutra canadensis ). Unfortunately, other imperiled species of lesser economic or recreational value have not been as fortunate. Efforts to conserve these lower-profile species have been minimal or conservation problems so immense that their complete recovery has been unsuccessful. Wilson (1992) suggested that 20 percent of all species on earth may be lost to extinction in the next four decades. If this disaster should occur, it would rival the greatest geological extinction episodes. Certainly, conservationists need to explore new methods for preserving mammalian diversity. In this chapter we will discuss the resource management history of aquatic mammals which are imperiled in the Southeast. In doing so we define an aquatic mammal as any mammal that is directly or indirectly associated with aquatic ecosystems. Imperiled mammals are any mammalian species, subspecies, or population listed as endangered, threatened, or of special concern on any state or federal list, and also includes mammals experiencing long-term population declines or significant range contractions.

Book chapter↗

Ground-water conditions in Georgia, 1997

Ground-water conditions in Georgia during 1997 and for the period of record were evaluated using data from ground-water-level and ground-water-quality monitoring networks. Data for 1997 included in this report are from continuous water-level records from 71 wells and chloride analyses from 14 wells. In 1997, annual mean ground-water levels in Georgia ranged from 6.2 feet (ft) lower to 5.6 ft higher than in 1996. Of the 71 wells summarized in this report, 23 wells had annual mean water levels that were higher, 35 wells had annual mean water levels that were lower, and 11 wells had annual mean water levels that were about the same in 1997 as during 1996. Data for two wells are incomplete because data collection was discontinued at one well, and the equipment was vandalized at one well. Record-low daily mean water levels were recorded in six wells tapping the Upper Floridan aquifer, one well tapping the Caliborne aquifer, two wells tapping the Clayton aquifer, and three wells tapping Cretaceous aquifers. These record lows were from 0.2 to 5.6 ft lower than previous record lows. Chloride concentration in water from the Upper Floridan aquifer in most of coastal Georgia was within drinking-water standards established by the Georgia Department of Natural Resources and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In the Savannah area, chloride concentration has not changed appreciably with time. However, chloride concentration in water from some wells that tap the Floridan aquifer system in the Brunswick area exceeds the drinking-water standard. Ground-water-level and ground-water-quality data are essential for water assessment and management. Ground-water-level fluctuations and trends can be used to estimate changes in aquifer storage resulting from the effects of ground-water withdrawal and recharge from precipitation. These data can be used to address water-management needs and to evaluate the effects of management and conservation programs. As part of the ground-water investigations conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the State of Georgia and city and county governments, a Statewide water-level- measurement program was started in 1938. Initially, this program consisted of an observation-well network in the coastal area of Georgia to monitor variations in ground- water storage and quality. Additional wells were later included in areas where data could be used to predict potential water-resource problems. During 1997, periodic water-level measurements were made in 67 wells, and continuous water-level measurements were obtained from 151 wells. Continuous water-level records were obtained using analog (pen and chart) recorders, digital recorders that record the water level at 30-minute or 60-minute intervals, and electronic data recorders that record the water level at 60-minute intervals. For wells having incomplete water-level record, water levels during periods of missing record may have been higher or lower than recorded water levels. Water samples collected from 23 wells during April and November 1997 were analyzed to determine chloride concentration in the Savannah and Brunswick areas.

Georgia↗

Prepublication communication of research results

Publishing of scientific findings is central to the scientific process, and it is traditional to consider findings “provisional” until accepted by a peer-reviewed journal. Until publication, communication of provisional findings beyond participants in the study is typically limited. This practice helps assure scientific integrity. However, a dilemma arises when a provisional finding has urgent societal consequences that may be exacerbated by delay. This dilemma may be particularly pronounced when a discovery concerns wildlife health, which could have implications for conservation, public health (i.e., zoonoses), or domestic animal health (e.g., avian influenza). A scientist may see a need for prepublication communication but consider such communication to be problematic. We suggest that common concerns about directed prepublication communication are generally misplaced. Our perspective comes from natural resources science and management, but we suspect that this situation could arise in any branch of science and that discussing these issues will help scientists who may not routinely work with public officials navigate an unfamiliar situation.

EcoHealth↗

Assessing the sustainability of Pacific walrus harvest in a changing environment

Harvest sustainability is a primary goal of wildlife management and conservation, and in a changing world it is increasingly important to consider environmental drivers of population dynamics alongside harvest in cohesive management plans. This is particularly pertinent for harvested species that are acutely experiencing effects of climate change. The Pacific walrus ( Odobenus rosmarus divergens ), a critical traditional subsistence resource for indigenous communities, is simultaneously subject to rapid habitat loss associated with diminishing sea ice and an increasing anthropogenic footprint in the Arctic. We developed a theta-logistic population modeling-management framework to evaluate various harvest scenarios combined with four potential climate/disturbance scenarios (ranging from optimistic–pessimistic) which simulates Pacific walrus population dynamics to the end of the 21 st century. We considered two types of harvest strategies: (1) adaptive harvest scenarios wherein harvest is calculated as a percentage of the population and annual harvests are updated at set intervals as the population is reassessed, and (2) non-adaptive harvest scenarios wherein annual harvest remains constant. All climate/disturbance scenarios indicated declines of varying severity in Pacific walrus abundance to the end of the 21 st century, even in the absence of harvest. However, we found that an adaptive annual harvest of 1.23% of the independent-aged female subset of the population (e.g., 1,280 independent-aged females harvested in 2020, representing contemporary harvest levels) met our criterion for sustainability (>70% probability of maintaining population abundance above maximum net productivity level) under all climate/disturbance scenarios, accepting a medium risk tolerance level of 25%. This suggests that the present rate of Pacific walrus harvest is sustainable and will continue to be—provided the harvest adapts to match changes in population dynamics. Our simulations suggest that a sustainable non-adaptive harvest is also possible, but only at low levels if the population declines as expected. Applying a constant annual harvest of 1,280 independent-aged females (equivalent to contemporary harvest levels of 1.23) exceeded our criterion for sustainability and resulted in a >5% chance of quasi-extinction by the end of the 21 st century under three of the four climate/disturbance scenarios we evaluated. Our results highlight the importance of adaptive co-management strategies, and we suggest such modeling frameworks are useful for managing for harvest sustainability in a changing climate.

BioRxiv↗

Processes influencing the transport and fate of contaminated sediments in the coastal ocean– Boston Harbor and Massachusetts Bay

Most of the major urban centers of the United States including Boston, New York, Washington, Chicago, New Orleans, Miami, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Seattle—are on a coast (fig. 1.1). All of these cities discharge treated sewage effluent into adjacent waters. In 2000, 74 percent of the U.S. population lived within 200 kilometers (km) of the coast. Between 1980 and 2002, the population density in coastal communities increased approximately 4.5 times faster than in noncoastal areas of the U.S. (Perkins, 2004). More people generate larger volumes of wastes, increase the demands on wastewater treatment, expand the area of impervious land surfaces, and use more vehicles that contribute contaminants to street runoff. According to the National Coastal Condition Report II (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2005a), on the basis of coastal habitat, water and sediment quality, benthic index, and fish tissue, the overall national coastal condition is only poor to fair and the overall coastal condition in the highly populated Northeast is poor. Scientific information helps managers to prioritize and regulate coastal-ocean uses that include recreation, commercial fishing, transportation, waste disposal, and critical habitat for marine organisms. These uses are often in conflict with each other and with environmental concerns. Developing a strategy for managing competing uses while maintaining sustainability of coastal resources requires scientific understanding of how the coastal ocean system behaves and how it responds to anthropogenic influences. This report provides a summary of a multidisciplinary research program designed to improve our understanding of the transport and fate of contaminants in Massachusetts coastal waters. Massachusetts Bay and Boston Harbor have been a focus of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) research because they provide a diverse geographic setting for developing a scientific understanding of the geology, geochemistry, and oceanography of coastal systems in general. Scientific data from this region can also be used to inform decisions about important economic, environmental, and political issues. From the economic viewpoint, the annual value of tourism and shipping in Massachusetts and Cape Cod Bays is about $1.5 billion and $1.9 billion, respectively. Commercial and recreational fishing generates about $240 million per year in the same region (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2005b). The environmental issue is the 300-year history of waste discharge from the Boston metropolitan area into the harbor. This history is punctuated by cycles of environmental degradation, public outcry, and improvements in the sewage treatment system. With each improvement, however, the continuous growth of population in greater Boston (fig. 1.2) and the resulting increase in the volume of waste exceeded the capacity of the treatment system, thereby setting the stage for a new contamination crisis. By the 1980s, the levels of contaminants in sediments of Boston Harbor were among the highest in the nation (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1987). Fish were diseased, shellfish beds were closed, and swimming beaches were unsafe after heavy rains; in general, water quality and aesthetics were below acceptable standards. Legal and political issues have always been part of Boston Harbor’s history. The environmental conditions in the 1980s were highlighted in a 1983 legal suit brought by the city of Quincy against the Metropolitan District Commission (MDC, the state agency responsible for sewage treatment) and heads of three state agencies for discharging untreated or poorly treated sewage into the harbor (Dolin, 2004). The suit never went to trial, but through the actions of a Massachusetts Superior Court, the issue of Boston Harbor contamination remained on the political and public agenda. The judge called the harbor “unsafe, unsanitary, indecent, in violation of the law (Clean Water Act), and a danger to the health and welfare of the people” (Forman, 1984). To force the state legislature to implement a plan to improve harbor conditions, the judge threatened to place the MDC in receivership and curtail new sewage hookups for industry. Under intense lobbying by business, the legislature created the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) in December 1984. The independent MWRA was established to manage Boston’s waste treatment system and was given the authority to float bonds to pay for major improvements in the treatment system. In 1985, a Federal court began hearings on a suit brought by the Conservation Law Foundation, the Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and towns of Quincy and Winthrop against the MDC and MWRA (as heir to responsibilities of the MDC) for years of violation of the Clean Water Act. The judge ruled against the defendants and required all the parties to submit a construction plan and schedule for a new sewage treatment system. From these submissions, he developed a schedule for treatment system upgrades that would give the “citizens of this commonwealth a public assurance that Boston Harbor will be cleaned up within a defined period of time” (Dolin, 2004). The MWRA’s Boston Harbor cleanup program (Levy and Connor, 1992) has transformed the Boston sewage system. Key improvements were to (1) reduce contaminants at the industrial source; (2) remediate leaks in the sewage-collection system; (3) eliminate sewage sludge discharge to the harbor; (4) upgrade sewage treatment from primary to secondary; (5) construct a new ocean outfall 15.2 km offshore in Massachusetts Bay for discharge of treated effluent (fig. 1.3); and (6) implement improvements in the combined-sewer-overflow system. As part of the harbor cleanup program, the MWRA developed a comprehensive monitoring program (summarized in MWRA, 2004) to assess changes in the harbor and bays that specifically related to the new sewage system. Additional information about conditions and processes in the coastal system on a regional scale and over a long time period was and continues to be important in predicting and interpreting local change. Implementation of the MWRA’s program and the mission of the USGS to understand the geology of the nation’s offshore waters provided an opportunity to conduct a cooperative multidisciplinary research program. This USGS program addresses basic scientific questions as well as concerns raised by management regarding the design, implementation, and assessment of the new sewage treatment system. Already active in Boston Harbor during the late 1970s, the USGS expanded research into Massachusetts Bay with a multidisciplinary program in 1989.

Massachusetts↗

U.S. Department of the Interior South Central Climate Science Center strategic science plan, 2013--18

The Department of the Interior (DOI) recognizes and embraces the unprecedented challenges of maintaining our Nation’s rich natural and cultural resources in the 21st century. The magnitude of these challenges demands that the conservation community work together to develop integrated adaptation and mitigation strategies that collectively address the impacts of climate change and other landscape-scale stressors. On September 14, 2009, DOI Secretary Ken Salazar signed Secretarial Order 3289 (amended February 22, 2010) entitled, “Addressing the Impacts of Climate Change on America’s Water, Land, and Other Natural and Cultural Resources.” The Order establishes the foundation for two partner-based conservation science entities to address these unprecedented challenges: Climate Science Centers (CSCs and Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs). CSCs and LCCs are the Department-wide approach for applying scientific tools to increase understanding of climate change and to coordinate an effective response to its impacts on tribes and the land, water, ocean, fish and wildlife, and cultural-heritage resources that DOI manages. Eight CSCs have been established and are managed through the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center (NCCWSC); each CSC works in close collaboration with their neighboring CSCs, as well as those across the Nation, to ensure the best and most efficient science is produced. The South Central CSC was established in 2012 through a cooperative agreement with the University of Oklahoma, Texas Tech University, Louisiana State University, the Chickasaw Nation, the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, Oklahoma State University, and NOAA’s Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Lab; hereafter termed the ”Consortium” of the South Central CSC. The Consortium has a broad expertise in the physical, biological, natural, and social sciences to address impacts of climate change on land, water, fish and wildlife, ocean, coastal, and cultural resources. The South Central CSC will provide scientific information, tools, and techniques that managers and other parties interested in land, water, wildlife, and cultural resources can use to anticipate, monitor, and adapt to climate change, actively engaging LCCs and other partners in translating science into management decisions. This document is the first Strategic Science Plan for the South Central CSC (2013-18). Using the January 2011 DOI guidance as a model, this document (1) describes the role and interactions of the South Central CSC among partners and stakeholders including Federal, State, and non-governmental organizations throughout the region; (2) describes a concept of what the center will provide to its partners; (3) defines a context for climate impacts in the south central United States; and (4) establishes the science priorities the center will address through research. Science priorities are currently organized as immediate or future research needs; however, this document is intended to be reevaluated and modified as partner needs change and as scientific work progresses.

Open-File Report↗

Southern Rockies Landscape Conservation Cooperative unit watershed erosion potential prioritization for check-dam installation

Changes in land-use practices and the extirpation (local extinction) of beaver populations in the early 20th century during European settlement are believed to have resulted in many changes in how streams in the Western United States function. Some of the negative changes that have resulted include stream channelization, soil erosion, changing vegetation, water turbidity, and a loss of overland flow. Efforts to restore streams and reduce soil erosion by water have included reintroductions of beaver, incorporating Native American traditional knowledge of dry-land farming techniques, and the installation of rigid check-dams. Many of these efforts have been successful in improving both intermittent and perennial stream function. Therefore, stakeholders in the Southern Rockies Landscape Conservation Cooperative (SRLCC) have identified a need to prioritize streams within their region of interest for the installation of check-dams to continue restoration and conservation efforts and to improve sediment catchment. Using Natural Resource Conservation Service soil databases, topographic features derived from digital elevation models, stream networks, and regional climatic patterns, I developed a ranking system for watershed potential erosion rates and suitability for check-dam placement across the SRLCC. This ranking system serves as a first step for land managers to prioritize areas for check-dam installation based on relatively static factors (soil properties, topography, and hydrology) that can contribute to rates of soil erosion by water and the stability of check-dams. Many other relatively dynamic factors over time can contribute to rates of soil erosion by water, such as recent wildfire events, changes in weather patterns and extreme climate events, and changing land-use such as grazing, logging, mining, development, and cultivation. These factors that influence vegetative and biological soil crusts cover are also important elements to the potential erosion of soil by water. Because of this, SRLCC stakeholders might consider further evaluation of the watersheds identified here as high ranking. Final watershed prioritization among the high-ranking watersheds identified here should include current knowledge of land-use and land-cover estimates to identify areas at risk for soil erosion or degree of existing erosion problems.

Open-File Report↗

Grass buffers for playas in agricultural landscapes: A literature synthesis

We summarize current knowledge about grass buffers for protecting small, isolated wetlands in agricultural contexts, including information relevant to protecting playas from runoff containing sediments, nutrients, pesticides, and other contaminants, and information on how buffers may affect densities and productivity of grassland birds. Land-uses surrounding the approximately 60,000 playas within the Playa Lakes Region (PLR), including intensive agriculture, feedlots, and oil extraction, can contribute to severe degradation of playas. Farming and grazing can lead to significant sedimentation in nearby playas, eliminating their ability to hold water, support the region’s biodiversity, or adequately recharge aquifers. Contaminants further degrade habitats and threaten the water quality of underlying aquifers, including the Ogallala Aquifer. Grass buffers hold promise as a management tool to reduce the amount of sediments and contaminants from agricultural runoff that enters playas. Effective buffer width is determined by acceptable sediment-reduction levels, potential water flow and velocity, landscape and soil variables, buffer species, and vegetation structure. Various models have been developed to predict buffer effectiveness; however, most of these models, including those provided by the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), remain unvalidated. The majority of buffer-effectiveness literature is based on simulated conditions in experimental trays or plots; no published studies of buffer design or effectiveness specifically address playas. Nonetheless, some general patterns have emerged regarding buffer design/effectiveness. Buffers 10–60 m wide are generally considered adequate for trapping most sediments, although in some cases buffers need to be >200 m. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Partners for Wildlife Program in the Southern High Plains recommend a buffer width of ~33 m planted with a diverse mix of native shortgrasses and mixed grasses as a starting point. Most dissolved contaminants, however, are removed from runoff only when they infiltrate the soil, where microbes or other processes can break down or sequester contaminants. Promoting runoff infiltration requires wider buffers with denser stem densities than those required for filtering sediments, which may result in hydrological changes in playas. Ultimately, the balance between runoff and infiltration determines whether or not water eventually reaches a given basin. Long-term buffer effectiveness requires regular maintenance, including excavation to remove overburdens of sediments, repairing vegetation damage, and removing over-mature vegetation or invasions of noxious weeds. Buffers may not be enough to protect playas; best management practices (BMPs; e.g., conservation tillage, contour tilling, and mulching herbicides into soil after application) that diminish soil erosion and contaminant runoff also may be necessary. Nutrient loads in runoff can be minimized by balancing nutrient input with nutrient requirements for livestock and crops. Pesticide application practices also require careful evaluation. Mowing or grazing rather than use of herbicides offer alternatives for suppressing invasive or undesirable plant species in buffers. Future research should entail multiple-scale approaches at regional, wetland-complex, and individual watershed scales. Information needs include direct measures of buffer effectiveness in ‘real-world’ systems, refinement and field tests of buffer-effectiveness models, how buffers may affect floral and faunal communities of playas, and basic ecological information on playa function and playa wildlife ecology. Understanding how wildlife communities respond to patch size and habitat fragmentation is crucial for addressing questions regarding habitat quality of grass buffers in playa systems.

Open-File Report↗

Quantifying regional ecological dynamics using agency monitoring data, ecological site descriptions, and ecological site groups

Information about what ecological conditions are likely, causes or drivers of degradation, and potential management actions to restore degraded lands may support land conservation and restoration decisions. State-and-transition models (STMs) describe persistent plant and ecological conditions that are possible (the “state”) within a given abiotic setting and drivers or actions that can cause shifts between states (the “transitions”). These primarily conceptual models are widely used to inform resource and conservation decisions. Data-driven STMs have been developed for some lands, but not at regional or national scales. Here, we demonstrate a new repeatable workflow for developing data-driven STMs in the United States (US). The approach leverages predictive maps of Ecological Site Groups (ESGs), extensive field-based Federal monitoring databases, information from Ecological Site Description (ESD) STMs, soil erosion models, remotely sensed productivity, and other available spatial information (fire, land protection, and drought) to provide context and descriptions of the data-driven states, including likely drivers of transitions. Results of this workflow applied to one dryland ESG in the Upper Colorado River Basin in the southwestern US suggest that an Invaded state (16% of 1352 plots) and some occurrences of a Grassland state (30% of plots) are in a degraded or at-risk condition with reduced ecosystem services. The most common drivers of state transitions in the associated ESDs ( n = 26) are related to livestock grazing and fire. The Invaded state in the ESG has evidence of degraded habitat quality and accelerated run-off while the Grassland state occurrences show reduced richness, productivity, and elevated erosion risk by wind. Areas subject to wildfire and with lower protection status had greater probability of Invaded state occurrence, generally supporting drivers in ESDs. The workflow presented here can serve as a template for describing ecological dynamics at regional scales, and support prioritization of land for conservation and climate adaptation activities.

Rangeland Ecology & Management↗

A quantitative soil-geomorphic framework for developing and mapping ecological site groups

Land management decisions need context about how landscapes will respond to different circumstances or actions. As ecologists’ understanding of nonlinear ecological dynamics has evolved into state-and-transition models (STMs), they have put more emphasis on defining and mapping the soil, geomorphological, and climate parameters that mediate these dynamics. The US Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service ecological site descriptions (ESDs) have become the foremost system in classifying lands into ecological units based on STMs. However, an exhaustive inventory of ESDs has proved challenging to complete in the United States, and there have been questions about the consistency of detail in areas completed and the ability to objectively support some assertions made in existing ESDs. To address these issues, this study examines ESDs in the diverse Upper Colorado River region, where ESDs are only partially complete, to look at quantitative approaches to generalizing ecological site concepts based on unifying underlying soil, geomorphology, and climate patterns. Using existing ESDs and vegetation monitoring plot data, results show that a simple hierarchical soil geomorphic unit (SGU) framework based on topographic mediation of moisture, soil salinity, soil depth, slope, rock content, and soil texture can represent much of the ecological dynamics cataloged in ESDs. Analyses of reference plant production data, ecological state attribution, and regional monitoring data show that the new SGUs represent more variation than common climate parameters. This study also included predictively mapping SGUs at 30-m resolution (Kappa of 0.53, 74% agreement with top two predictions in validation). An optimized combination of SGUs with climate zones derived from an aridity index and maximum temperature of the hottest month resulted in an ecological site group framework that condensed over 826 unique ecological site records at various stages of completeness in the regional soil survey down to 35 intuitive and mappable ecological site groups.

Rangeland Ecology and Management↗

Adaptive management in the U.S. National Wildlife Refuge System: Science-management partnerships for conservation delivery

Adaptive management is an approach to recurrent decision making in which uncertainty about the decision is reduced over time through comparison of outcomes predicted by competing models against observed values of those outcomes. The National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS) of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is a large land management program charged with making natural resource management decisions, which often are made under considerable uncertainty, severe operational constraints, and conditions that limit ability to precisely carry out actions as intended. The NWRS presents outstanding opportunities for the application of adaptive management, but also difficult challenges. We describe two cooperative programs between the Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Geological Survey to implement adaptive management at scales ranging from small, single refuge applications to large, multi-refuge, multi-region projects. Our experience to date suggests three important attributes common to successful implementation: a vigorous multi-partner collaboration , practical and informative decision framework components , and a sustained commitment to the process. Administrators in both agencies should consider these attributes when developing programs to promote the use and acceptance of adaptive management in the NWRS.

Journal of Environmental Management↗

Efficacy of manipulating reproduction of common ravens to conserve sensitive prey species: Three case studies

Expansion of human enterprise across western North America has resulted in an increase in availability of anthropogenic resource subsidies for generalist species. This has led to increases in generalists’ population numbers across landscapes that were previously less suitable for their current demographic rates. Of particular concern are growing populations of common ravens ( Corvus corax ; ravens), because predation by ravens is linked to population declines of sensitive species. Ecosystem managers seek management options for mitigating the adverse effects of raven predation where unsustainable predator–prey conflicts exist. We present 3 case studies examining how manipulating reproductive success of ravens influences demographic rates of 2 sensitive prey species. Two case studies examine impacts of removing raven nests or oiling raven eggs on nest survival of greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ; sage-grouse) within Wyoming and the Great Basin of California and Nevada, USA, respectively. The third case study uses Mojave desert tortoise ( Gopherus agassizii ; tortoise) decoys to examine effects of oiling raven eggs on depredation rates of juvenile tortoises in the Mojave Desert in California. Initial trial years from all 3 case studies were consistent in finding improved vital rates associated with the application of strategies for reducing reproductive success of ravens. Specifically, removal of raven nests resulted in increased nest survival of sage-grouse within treatment areas where predation by ravens was the primary cause of nest failure. In addition, nest survival of sage-grouse and survival of juvenile tortoise decoys was higher following a treatment of oiling the eggs of ravens in their nests at 2 sites within the Great Basin and 4 tortoise conservation areas in the Mojave Desert in California. Along with specialized technologies that can make techniques such as egg-oiling more feasible, these findings support these management practices as important tools for managing ravens, especially in areas where breeding ravens have negative impacts on sensitive prey species.

California, Nevada, Wyoming↗

USGS St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center--Research activities in the U.S. Virgin Islands

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center in Florida investigates earth-science processes related to coastal and marine environments as well as to societal implications of natural hazards, resource sustainability, and environmental change. The Center is conducting ongoing research in and around the U.S. Virgin Islands that is providing baseline information for resource management and for assessing the health of and environmental changes to vital ecosystems such as coral reefs. In particular, projects are improving the understanding of coral health, advancing the ability to forecast future changes in coral reef ecosystems, and acquiring topographic data for use in inventorying, monitoring, and conserving coastal and marine environments.

Virgin Islands↗

Development of a digital land cover data base for the Selawik National Wildlife Refuge

Digital land cover and terrain data of the Selawik National Wildlife Refuge were produced by the U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS) Earth Resources Observation Systems Alaska Field Office for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. These and other environmental data were incorporated into a Fish and Wildlife Service geographic information system to prepare a comprehensive conservation plan and an environmental impact statement for the refuge and to assist in research and management of the refuge. The digital data base, stored on tapes, includes land cover classifications from Landsat multispectral scanner data, elevation, slope, and aspect data for the area covered by the USGS Selawik and Shungnak l:250,000-scale topographic maps. The maps incorporate more than 90 percent of the refuge. Additional digital data in the data base include (a) land cover of the entire refuge at 50-, 200-, and 400-m pixel sizes derived from Landsat multispectral scanner data; (b) Landsat multispectral scanner data registered to a 50-m Universal Transverse Mercator grid; (c) elevation, slope, aspect, and solar illumination data registered to each Landsat scene; (d) stream hydrography and surficial geology digitized from USGS l:250,000-scale quadrangle maps; and (e) Refuge and wilderness boundaries. In addition to the digital products, color hard copy maps were produced from the l:250,000-scale quadrangle base land cover, elevation, slope, and aspect digital data.

Alaska↗

Ecosystem services valuation to support decisionmaking on public lands—A case study of the San Pedro River watershed, Arizona

This report details the findings of the Bureau of Land Management–U.S. Geological Survey Ecosystem Services Valuation Pilot Study. This project evaluated alternative methods and tools that quantify and value ecosystem services, and it assessed the tools’ readiness for use in the Bureau of Land Management decisionmaking process. We tested these tools on the San Pedro River watershed in northern Sonora, Mexico, and southeast Arizona. The study area includes the San Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area (managed by the Bureau of Land Management), which has been a focal point for conservation activities and scientific research in recent decades. We applied past site-specific primary valuation studies, value transfer, the Wildlife Habitat Benefits Estimation Toolkit, and the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs (InVEST) and Artificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services (ARIES) models to value locally important ecosystem services for the San Pedro River watershed—water, carbon, biodiversity, and cultural values. We tested these approaches on a series of scenarios to evaluate ecosystem service changes and the ability of the tools to accommodate scenarios. A suite of additional tools were either at too early a stage of development to run, were proprietary, or were place-specific tools inappropriate for application to the San Pedro River watershed. We described the strengths and weaknesses of these additional ecosystem service tools against a series of evaluative criteria related to their usefulness for Bureau of Land Management decisionmaking. Using these tools, we quantified gains or losses of ecosystem services under three categories of scenarios: urban growth, mesquite management, and water augmentation. These results quantify tradeoffs and could be useful for decisionmaking within Bureau of Land Management district or field offices. Results are accompanied by a relatively high level of uncertainty associated with model outputs, valuation methods, and discount rates applied. Further guidance on representing uncertainty and applying uncertain results in decisionmaking would benefit both tool developers and those offices in using ecosystem services to compare management tradeoffs. Decisionmakers and Bureau of Land Management managers at the State-, district-, and field-office level would also benefit from continuing model improvements, training, and guidance on tool use that can be provided by the U.S. Geological Survey, the Bureau of Land Management, and the Department of the Interior. Tradeoffs were identified in the level of effort needed to parameterize and run tools and the amount and quality of information they provide to the decision process. We found the Wildlife Habitat Benefits Estimation Toolkit, Ecosystem Services Review, and United Nations Environment Programme–World Conservation Monitoring Centre Ecosystem Services Toolkit to be immediately feasible for application by the Bureau of Land Management, given proper guidance on their use. It is also feasible for the Bureau of Land Management to use the InVEST model, but in early 2012 the process of parameterizing the model required resources and expertise that are unlikely to be available in most Bureau of Land Management district or field offices. Application of past primary valuation is feasible, but developing new primary-valuation studies is too time consuming for regular application. Value transfer approaches (aside from the Wildlife Habitat Benefits Estimation Toolkit) are best applied carefully on the basis of guidelines described in this report, to reduce transfer error. The ARIES model can provide useful information in regions modeled in the past (Arizona, California, Colorado, and Washington), but it lacks some features that will improve its usability, such as a generalized model that could be applied anywhere in the United States. Eleven other tools described in this report could become useful as the tools more fully develop, in high-profile cases for which additional resources are available for tool application or in case-study regions where place-specific models have already been developed. To improve the value of these tools in decisionmaking, we suggest scientific needs that agencies such as U.S. Geological Survey can help meet—for instance, development and support of data archives. Such archives could greatly reduce resource needs and improve the reliability and consistency of results. Given the rapid state of evolution in the field, periodic follow-up studies on ecosystem services tools would help to ensure that the Bureau of Land Management and other public land management agencies are kept up to date on new tools and features that bring ecosystem services closer to readiness for use in regular decisionmaking.

Arizona;Sonora↗