USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Water Economics and Policy”

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 109 records · Page 6Linked to original sources
USGS2020

A decision framework to analyze tide-gate options for restoration of the Herring River Estuary, Massachusetts

The collective set of decisions involved with the restoration of degraded wetlands is often more complex than considering only ecological responses and outcomes. Restoration is commonly driven by a complex interaction of social, economic, and ecological factors representing the mandate of resource stewards and the values of stakeholders. The authors worked with the Herring River Restoration Committee (HRRC) to develop a decision framework to understand the implications of complex tradeoffs and to guide decision making for the restoration of the 1,100-acre Herring River estuary within Cape Cod National Seashore, which has been restricted from tidal influence for more than 100 years. The HRRC represents decision maker and stakeholder interests in the restoration process. For a 25-year planning horizon, decisions involve the rate at which newly constructed water-control structures allow tidal exchange, and the timing and location of implementing numerous secondary management options. Decisions affect multiple stakeholders, including residents of two adjacent towns who value the watershed for numerous benefits and whose economy relies on seasonal activities and aquaculture. System response to management decisions is characterized by a high degree of uncertainty and risk with positive and negative outcomes possible. Decision policies will affect biophysical (for example, sediment transport, discharge of fecal coliform bacteria) and ecological (for example, vegetation response, fish passage, effects on shellfish) processes, as well as socioeconomic interests (for example, effects on property, viewscapes, recreation). The framework provides a structured approach for evaluating tradeoffs among multiple objectives (ecological and social) while appropriately characterizing relevant uncertainties and accounting for levels of risk tolerances and the values of decision makers and stakeholders. Consequences of tide-gate management options are predicted using a range of methods from quantitative physical process models to elicited expert judgement. The decision framework is presented, and the software developed to implement the tradeoff analysis is introduced. The results from an initial prototype analysis using a software application developed for analyses of tradeoffs and of sensitivity of the decision to risk and uncertainty are presented. The next step is to use the decision-support application to analyze options using improved predictions.

Massachusetts↗
USGS1977

Conversion factors: SI metric and U.S. customary units

The policy of the U.S. Geological Survey is to foster use of the International System of Units (SI) which was defined by the 11th General Conference of Weights and Measures in 1960. This modernized metric system constitutes an international "language" by means of which communications throughout the world's scientific and economic communities may be improved. This publication is designed to familiarize the reader with the SI units of measurement that correspond to the common units frequently used in programs of the Geological Survey. In the near future, SI units will be used exclusively in most publications of the Survey; the conversion factors provided herein will help readers to obtain a "feel" for each unit and to "think metric."

General Information Product↗
USGS2014

The future of nearshore processes research

The nearshore is the transition region between land and the continental shelf including (from onshore to offshore) coastal plains, wetlands, estuaries, coastal cliffs, dunes, beaches, surf zones (regions of wave breaking), and the inner shelf (Figure ES-1). Nearshore regions are vital to the national economy, security, commerce, and recreation. The nearshore is dynamically evolving, is often densely populated, and is under increasing threat from sea level rise, long-term erosion, extreme storms, and anthropogenic influences. Worldwide, almost one billion people live at elevations within 10 m of present sea level. Long-term erosion threatens communities, infrastructure, ecosystems, and habitat. Extreme storms can cause billions of dollars of damage. Degraded water quality impacts ecosystem and human health. Nearshore processes, the complex interactions between water, sediment, biota, and humans, must be understood and predicted to manage this often highly developed yet vulnerable nearshore environment. Over the past three decades, the understanding of nearshore processes has improved. However, societal needs are growing with increased coastal urbanization and threats of future climate change, and significant scientific challenges remain. To address these challenges, members of academia, industry, and federal agencies (USGS, USACE, NPS, NOAA, FEMA, ONR) met at the “The Past and Future of Nearshore Processes Research: Reflections on the Sallenger Years and a New Vision for the Future” workshop to develop a nearshore processes research vision where societal needs and science challenges intersect. The resulting vision is comprised of three broad research themes: Long-term coastal evolution due to natural and anthropogenic processes: As global climate change alters the rates of sea level rise and potentially storm patterns and coastal urbanization increases over the coming decades, an understanding of coastal evolution is critical. Improved knowledge of long-term morphological, ecological, and societal processes and their interactions will result in an improved ability to simulate coastal change. This will enable proactive solutions for resilient coasts and better guidance for reducing coastal vulnerability. Extreme Events: Flooding, erosion, and the subsequent recovery: Hurricane Sandy caused flooding and erosion along hundreds of miles of shoreline, flooded New York City, and impacted communities and infrastructure. Overall U.S. coastal extreme event related economic losses have increased substantially. Furthermore, climate change may cause an increase in coastal extreme events and rising sea levels could increase the occurrence of extreme events. Addressing this research theme will result in an improved understanding of the physical processes during extreme events, leading to improved models of flooding, erosion, and recovery. The resulting societal benefit will be more resilient coastal communities. The physical, biological and chemical processes impacting human and ecosystem health: Nearshore regions are used for recreation, tourism, and human habitation, and provide habitat and valuable ecosystem services. These areas must be sustained for future generations, however overall coastal water quality is declining due to microbial pathogens, fertilizers, pesticides, and heavy metal contamination, threatening ecosystem and human health. To ensure sustainable nearshore regions, predictive real-time water- and sediment-based based pollutant modeling capabilities must be developed, which requires expanding our knowledge of the physics, chemistry, and biology of the nearshore. The resulting societal benefits will include better beach safety, healthier ecosystems, and improved mitigation and regulatory policies. The scientists and engineers of the U.S. nearshore community are poised to make significant progress on these research themes, which have significant societal impact. The U.S. nearshore community, including academic, government, and industry colleagues, recommends multi-agency investment into a coordinated development of observational and modeling research infrastructure to address these themes, as discussed in the whitepaper. The observational infrastructure should include development of new sensors and methods, focused observational programs, and expanded nearshore observing systems. The modeling infrastructure should include improved process representation, better model coupling, incorporation of data assimilation techniques, and testing of real-time models. The observations will provide test beds to compare and improve models.

Report↗
USGS2026

Valuing socio-economic and ecological attributes of forested watershed restoration to reduce wildfire risk in the southwestern U.S.

Forest restoration in a watershed can provide numerous ecological improvements and social benefits, including reducing the risk of extreme wildfire. Understanding the values of the accrued benefits can be used to evaluate the use of funds to support restoration. The Rio Grande watershed is a vast watershed covering approximately 335,000 mile 2 (867,646 km 2 ). The Rio Grande watershed provides a host of ecosystem services and recreation opportunities and supports municipal water supplies. We estimate the non-market values of forest restoration in the Rio Grande watershed using a choice experiment (CE) approach. While the ecological benefits are established in literature, we focus on the social characteristics, capturing the human-forest system in a comprehensive manner. Our results indicate a significant willingness to pay (WTP) for improving air quality, reducing private property damage, and creating local jobs, with the highest WTP for job creation. Split-sample analysis indicates respondents residing within the watershed highly value the socio-economic attributes of the restoration, while ecological attributes are preferred more outside of the watershed. Our results provide insights into the benefits of multi-dimensional services from forest restoration activities in a watershed.

New Mexico↗
USGS2023

Gains and gaps in knowledge surrounding freshwater mollusk ecosystem services

Ecosystems provide essential services to people including food, water, climate regulation, and aesthetic experiences. Biodiversity can enhance and stabilize ecosystem function and the resulting services natural systems provide. Freshwater mollusks are a diverse group that provide a variety of ecosystem services through their feeding habits (e.g., filter feeding, grazing), top-down and bottom-up effects on food webs, provisioning of habitat, use as a food resource by people, and cultural importance. Research focused on quantifying the direct and indirect ways mollusks influence ecosystem services may help inform policy makers and the public about the value of mollusk communities to society. The Freshwater Mollusk Conservation Society highlighted the need to evaluate mollusk ecosystem services in their 2016 National Strategy for the Conservation of Native Freshwater Mollusks, and, while significant progress has been made, considerable work remains across the research, management, and outreach communities. We briefly review the global status of native freshwater mollusks, assess the current state of knowledge regarding their ecosystem services, and highlight recent advances and knowledge gaps to guide further research and conservation actions. Our intention is to provide ecologists, conservationists, economists, and social scientists with information to improve science-based consideration of the social, ecological, and economic value of mollusk communities to healthy aquatic systems.

Freshwater Mollusk Biology and Conservation↗
USGS2018

Food‐web structure and ecosystem function in the Laurentian Great Lakes—Toward a conceptual model

The relationship between food‐web structure (i.e., trophic connections, including diet, trophic position, and habitat use, and the strength of these connections) and ecosystem functions (i.e., biological, geochemical, and physical processes in an ecosystem, including decomposition, production, nutrient cycling, and nutrient and energy flows among community members) determines how an ecosystem responds to perturbations, and thus is key to understanding the adaptive capacity of a system (i.e., ability to respond to perturbation without loss of essential functions). Given nearly ubiquitous changing environmental conditions and anthropogenic impacts on global lake ecosystems, understanding the adaptive capacity of food webs supporting important resources, such as commercial, recreational, and subsistence fisheries, is vital to ecological and economic stability. Herein, we describe a conceptual framework that can be used to explore food‐web structure and associated ecosystem functions in large lakes. We define three previously recognised broad habitat compartments that constitute large lake food webs (nearshore, pelagic, and profundal). We then consider, at three levels, how energy and nutrients flow: (a) into each basal resource compartment; (b) within each compartment; and (c) among multiple compartments (coupling). Flexible shifts in food‐web structures (e.g., via consumers altering their diet or habitat) that sustain these flows in the face of perturbations provide evidence for adaptive capacity. We demonstrate the conceptual framework through a synthesis of food‐web structure and ecosystem function in the Laurentian Great Lakes, with emphasis on the upper trophic levels (i.e., fishes). Our synthesis showed evidence of notable adaptive capacity. For example, fishes increased benthic coupling in response to invasion by mussels and round gobies. However, we also found evidence of loss of adaptive capacity through species extirpations (e.g., widespread collapse in the abundance and diversity of ciscoes, Coregonus spp., except in Lake Superior). In large freshwater lakes, fishery managers have traditionally taken a top‐down approach, focusing on stocking and harvest policy. By contrast, water quality managers have focused on nutrient effects on chemical composition and lower trophic levels of the ecosystem. The synthesised conceptual model provides resource managers a tool to more systematically interpret how lower food‐web dynamics influence harvestable fish populations, and vice versa, and to act accordingly such that sustainable resource practices can be achieved. We identify key gaps in knowledge that impede a fuller understanding of the adaptive capacities of large lakes. In general, we found a greater uncertainty in our understanding of processes influencing energy and nutrient flow within and among habitats than flows into the system.

Great Lakes↗
USGS1994

Overview of the National Water-Quality Assessment Program

The Nation's water resources are the basis for life and our economic vitality. These resources support a complex web of human activities and fishery and wildlife needs that depend upon clean water. Demands for good-quality water for drinking, recreation, farming, and industry are rising, and as a result, the American public is concerned about the condition and sustainability of our water resources. The American public is asking: Is it safe to swim in and drink water from our rivers or lakes? Can we eat the fish that come from them? Is our ground water polluted? Is water quality degrading with time, and if so, why? Has all the money we've spent to clean up our waters, done any good? The U.S. Geological Survey's National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program was designed to provide information that will help answer these questions. NAWQA is designed to assess historical, current, and future water-quality conditions in representative river basins and aquifers nationwide. One of the primary objectives of the program is to describe relations between natural factors, human activities, and water-quality conditions and to define those factors that most affect water quality in different parts of the Nation. The linkage of water quality to environmental processes is of fundamental importance to water-resource managers, planners, and policy makers. It provides a strong and unbiased basis for better decisionmaking by those responsible for making decisions that affect our water resources, including the United States Congress, Federal, State, and local agencies, environmental groups, and industry. Information from the NAWQA Program also will be useful for guiding research, monitoring, and regulatory activities in cost effective ways.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2019

Back from the brink: Sustainable management of the Lake Erie walleye fishery

This chapter describes management actions implemented after a large-scale population decline of the Walleye Sander vitreus population in Lake Erie, one of the Laurentian Great Lakes in North America. Intensive fishery exploitation during the 1950s combined with declining water quality conditions collapsed the Walleye stock during the early 1960s. The fishery persisted at low levels until 1970 when the fishery was closed (1970–1972) due to elevated mercury concentrations in Walleye tissue. Lake Erie fishery managers at the time recognized the need for a coordinated, multi-agency approach to protect this ecologically, economically, and socially important resource. The harvest ban was lifted in 1973 when mercury levels dropped below advisory levels. In 1976, an interagency management framework was established, which relied on a coordinated, science-based management philosophy consisting of estimating safe harvest levels, performing applied research, and conducting annual population assessments. The population rebounded during the 1980s in response to improving environmental conditions, regulated harvest, and a series of strong recruitment events. Declines in harvest and population size were again observed during the late 1990s and mid-2000s, likely due to variation in natural processes controlling recruitment, and fishery managers enacted harvest practices during this period to promote long-term sustainability. Today, Lake Erie Walleyes support one of the largest self-sustaining freshwater fisheries in North America. Throughout the years, Lake Erie managers have iteratively adopted changes to their population assessment model and altered harvest policies to avoid future fishery and population collapses. More than 40 years later, Lake Erie continues to support commercial and recreational fisheries lake wide. Lessons learned from the stock recovery and subsequent coordinated management for fishery sustainability include the importance of conducting routine population assessments, using science-based research to address key uncertainties, adopting modern stock assessment approaches, incorporating stakeholder input into the quota setting process, and addressing environmental concerns collaboratively at the lake level.

Book chapter↗
USGS2007

Recommendations for a barrier island breach management plan for Fire Island National Seashore, including the Otis Pike High Dune Wilderness Area, Long Island, New York

The U.S Army Corps of Engineers, New York District is developing engineering plans, including economic costs and benefits, for storm damage reduction along an 83 mile stretch of the coastal barrier islands and beaches on the south shore of Long Island, NY from Fire Island Inlet east to the Montauk Point headland. The plan, expected to include various alternatives for storm protection and erosion mitigation, is referred to as the Fire Island to Montauk Point Reformulation Plan (FIMP). These plans are expected to follow the Corps of Engineers’ Environmental Operating Principles striving for long term environmental sustainability and balance between environmental protection and protection of human health and property. Fire Island National Seashore (FIIS), a 19,579 acre unit of the National Park System includes a 32 mile long coastal barrier island located within the FIMP project area. A seven-mile section of the park, Otis Pike Fire Island High Dune Wilderness Area, is also a designated Federal Wilderness Area. The FIIS includes not only the barrier island and sand dunes, but also several islands, sand flats and wetlands landward of the barrier, submerged parts of Great South Bay shoreface, extending approximately 4,000 feet into the bay with the inner shelf region extending approximately 1,000 feet seaward of the Fire Island shoreline. The Fire Island barrier islands, a sand-starved system dominated by highly dynamic processes, are struggling to maintain their integrity in the face of sea-level rise and storms. Adding to the dilemma is that development on the barriers and the mainland has increased greatly during the past 50 years. As such, managers and decision makers in federal agencies, state agencies and local governments are challenged to balance tradeoffs between protection of lives and property, public access and long term conservation of natural habitats and processes and the plants and animals that depend on these habitats. National Park Service (NPS) policy stipulates that natural coastal processes be maintained to the greatest extent possible and not be impeded so as to conserve landforms, habitats and natural ecosystem resources that reply on the landforms and processes for long-term sustainability of the national park. Storms and associated processes such as waves, tides, currents and relative sea-level change are critical elements for the formation and evolution of these barrier islands, sand dunes, back-barrier sand flats and lagoons and vegetated wetlands. Processes such as wave run-up, overwash and barrier beaching, which occur during elevated storm surge are all necessary processes in enabling the efficient transfer of sediments, nutrients and marine water from the Atlantic Ocean across barriers and into Great South Bay. A large body of scientific data and information published over the past 50 years shows that such transfers of sediment and water from the ocean to the bays are essential for the long-term maintenance of the barrier island and back-bay systems and their biologically diverse habitats an d ecosystems. Current relative sea-level rise (~12 in/century) is chronic and pervasive in driving Long Island coastal change and with the likelihood of accelerating sea level rise in the near future, coastal hazards such as erosion, inundation, and storm surge flooding will increase, with corresponding increased risk to life and property on both Fire Island and on the mainland. In addition, the cumulative effects over the past century and more, both direct and indirect, of human impacts on the Long Island coast have altered the barrier beach and dunes and sediment transport processes. These impacts have likely increased the potential for breaching and increased risk to life and property on the coast and the mainland. Examples of direct impacts are: the stone jetties at Moriches, Shinnecock, and Fire Island tidal inlets and groin field structures at Westhampton that alter littoral processes, armoring and erosion-control stabilization of the headlandds such as the Montauk Point headlands, and deepening of navigation channels by dredging through the tidal inlets and in the bays. Indirect impacts that have a bearing on decisions to deal with breaching are: high-risk development of the barrier islands and low-lying areas of the mainland vulnerable to flooding, and the dredging of nearshore sand shoals for beach nourishment. The NPS strives to employ a coastal management framework for decision making that is based on assessment of the physical and ecological properties of the shoreline as well as human welfare and property. In order to protect developed areas of Fire Island and the mainland from loss of life, flooding, and other economic and physical damage, the NPS will likely need to consider allowing artificial closure of some breaches within the FIIS under certain circumstances. The decision by the NPS to allow breaches to evolve naturally and possibly close or to allow artificially closing breaches is based on four criteria: 1. Volumes of sediment transported landward and exchange of water and nutrients; 2. Elevated water levels and flooding risk to mainland life and property; 3. Engineering processes of artificial closure; and 4. Economic costs and benefits of artificial closure. This report for breach management presents protocols which specify when breach closures within the FIIS might be desirable and necessary, as well as provides recommendations for structural breach closure engineering operations which are indented to minimize negative impacts to the natural wilderness values and cultural resources within the FIIS, particularly the Otis Pike Wilderness Area. The goal of the plan is to strike a balance between protecting natural resources and allowing natural processes to operate and avoiding loss of life and excessive property damage.

New York↗
USGS2013

2011 floods of the central United States

The Central United States experienced record-setting flooding during 2011, with floods that extended from headwater streams in the Rocky Mountains, to transboundary rivers in the upper Midwest and Northern Plains, to the deep and wide sand-bedded lower Mississippi River. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), as part of its mission, collected extensive information during and in the aftermath of the 2011 floods to support scientific analysis of the origins and consequences of extreme floods. The information collected for the 2011 floods, combined with decades of past data, enables scientists and engineers from the USGS to provide syntheses and scientific analyses to inform emergency managers, planners, and policy makers about life-safety, economic, and environmental-health issues surrounding flood hazards for the 2011 floods and future floods like it. USGS data, information, and scientific analyses provide context and understanding of the effect of floods on complex societal issues such as ecosystem and human health, flood-plain management, climate-change adaptation, economic security, and the associated policies enacted for mitigation. Among the largest societal questions is "How do we balance agricultural, economic, life-safety, and environmental needs in and along our rivers?" To address this issue, many scientific questions have to be answered including the following: * How do the 2011 weather and flood conditions compare to the past weather and flood conditions and what can we reasonably expect in the future for flood magnitudes? * What is the “natural” hydrology of these watersheds and how have they been changed? * How do rivers change during floods and what effects do they have on the natural and built environment: conversely, what effects do the natural and built environments have on rivers and floods? * Do floods contribute to the transport and fate of contaminants that affect human and ecosystem health? In an effort to help address these and other questions, USGS Professional Paper 1798 consists of independent but complementary chapters dealing with various scientific aspects of the 2011 floods in the Central United States.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2023

Science to support conservation action in a large river system: The Willamette River, Oregon, USA

Management and conservation efforts that support the recovery and protection of large rivers are daunting, reflecting the complexity of the challenge and extent of effort (in terms of policy, economic investment, and spatial extent) needed to afford measurable change. These large systems have generally experienced intensive development and regulation, compromising their capacity to respond to disturbances such as climate change or wildfire. Functionally, large river and basin management require insights gained from social, ecological, geophysical, and hydrological sciences. This multi-disciplinary perspective can unveil the integrated relationship between a river network's biotic community and seasonally variable environmental conditions that are often influenced by human activities. Large rivers and their basins are constantly changing due to anthropogenic influences and as climate modifies patterns of temperature and precipitation. Because of these factors, the state of knowledge must advance to address changing conditions. The Willamette River, in western Oregon, USA, is a prime example of a basin that has experienced significant degradation and investment in rehabilitation in recent decades. Innovative science has facilitated development of fine-scale, spatially extensive datasets and models that can generate targeted conservation and rehabilitation actions that are prioritized across the entire river network. This prioritization allows investment decisions to be driven by site-specific conditions while simultaneously considering potentials for ecological improvement. Here, we review hydrologic, geomorphic, ecologic, and social conditions in the Willamette River basin through time—including pre-settlement, river development, and contemporary periods—and offer a future vision for consideration. Currently, detailed information about fish populations and habitat, hydrologic conditions, geomorphology, water quality, and land use can be leveraged to make informed decisions about protection, rehabilitation, and development. The time is ripe for strategic management and goal development for the entire Willamette River, and these efforts can be informed by comprehensive science realized through established institutions (e.g., public agencies, non-profit watershed groups, Tribes, and universities) focused on conservation and management. The approaches to science and social-network creation that were pioneered in the Willamette River basin offer insights into the development of comprehensive conservation-based planning that could be implemented in other large river systems globally.

Oregon↗
USGS2012

USGS Environmental health science strategy: providing environmental health science for a changing world: Public review release

America has an abundance of natural resources. We have bountiful clean water, fertile soil, and unrivaled national parks, wildlife refuges, and public lands. These resources enrich our lives and preserve our health and wellbeing. These resources have been maintained because of our history of respect for their value and an enduring commitment to their vigilant protection. Awareness of the social, economic, and personal value of the health of our environment is increasing. The emergence of environmentally driven diseases caused by environmental exposure to contaminants and pathogens is a growing concern worldwide. New health threats and patterns of established threats are affected by both natural and anthropogenic changes to the environment. Human activities are key drivers of emerging (new and re-emerging) health threats. Societal demands for land and natural resources, a better quality of life, improved economic prosperity, and the environmental impacts associated with these demands will continue to increase. Natural earth processes, climate trends, and related climatic events will add to the environmental impact of human activities. These environmental drivers will influence exposure to disease agents, including viral, bacterial, prion, and fungal pathogens, parasites, natural earth materials, toxins and other biogenic compounds, and synthetic chemicals and substances. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) defines environmental health science broadly as the interdisciplinary study of relations among the quality of the physical environment, the health of the living environment, and human health. The interactions among these three spheres are driven by human activities, ecological processes, and natural earth processes; the interactions affect exposure to contaminants and pathogens and the severity of environmentally driven diseases in animals and people. This definition provides USGS with a framework for synthesizing natural science information from across the Bureau and providing it to environmental, natural resource, agricultural, and public-health managers. The USGS is a Federal science agency with a broad range of natural science expertise relevant to environmental health. USGS provides scientific information and tools as a scientific basis for management and policy decision making. USGS specializes in science at the environment-health interface, by characterizing the processes that affect the interaction among the physical environment, the living environment, and people, and the resulting factors that affect ecological and human exposure to disease agents. This report describes a 10-year strategy that encompasses the portfolio of USGS environmental health science. It summarizes national environmental health priorities that USGS is best suited to address, and will serve as a strategic framework for USGS environmental health science goals, actions, and outcomes for the next decade. Implementation of this strategy is intended to aid coordination of USGS environmental health activities and to provide a focal point for disseminating information to stakeholders. The "One Health" paradigm advocated by the World Health Organization (WHO, 2011), and the American Veterinary Medicine Association (AVMA, 2008), among others, is based on a general recognition that the health of humans, animals, and the environment are inextricably linked. Thus, successful efforts to protect that health will require increased interdisciplinary research and increased communication and collaboration among the broader scientific and health community. This strategy is built upon that paradigm. The vision, mission, and five cornerstone goals of the USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy were developed with significant input from a wide range of stakeholders. Vision - The USGS is a premier source of the environmental health science needed to safeguard the health of the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. Mission - The mission of USGS in environmental health science is to contribute scientific information to environmental, natural resource, agricultural, and public-health managers, who use that science to support sound decision making. USGS provides the science to: - Goal 1: Identify, prioritize, and detect contaminants and pathogens of emerging environmental concern. - Goal 2: Reduce the impact of contaminants on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Goal 3: Reduce the impact of pathogens on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Goal 4: Discover the complex interactions and combined effects of exposure to contaminants and pathogens. - Goal 5: Prepare for and respond to environmental impacts and related health threats of natural and anthropogenic disasters. Goals 1 through 4 are intended to provide science to address environmental health threats in a logical order, from informing prevention and preparedness, to supporting systematic management response to environmental health issues. Goal 4 addresses the interaction among contaminants and pathogens, an issue of emerging concern in environmental health science. Goal 5 acknowledges the fact that natural and anthropogenic disasters can cause immediate and prolonged adverse environmental health threats. This strategy proposes that USGS take the following strategic science actions to achieve each of the five goals of this strategy: Goal 1: Identify, prioritize, and detect contaminants and pathogens of emerging environmental concern. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Prioritize contaminants and pathogens of emerging concern to guide research, detection, and management activities. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Conduct surveillance and monitoring to provide early warning of emerging health threats. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Develop approaches and tools that identify vulnerable environmental settings, ecosystems, and species. Goal 2: Reduce the impact of contaminants on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Systematically characterize the sources, occurrence, transport and fate of environmental contaminants to guide efforts to manage and mitigate contamination. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Evaluate the threats of contamination on the health of the environment, fish, wildlife, and people, and inform the associated management and protection efforts. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Characterize potential human exposure to support establishment of health-based standards or guidelines and contamination-reduction efforts. Goal 3: Reduce the impact of pathogens on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Determine the biotic and abiotic factors that control the ecology of infectious diseases affecting natural populations of aquatic and terrestrial species and potential transmission to other animals and humans. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Establish how natural and anthropogenic environmental changes affect the distribution and severity of infectious diseases in natural populations of aquatic and terrestrial species and potential transmission to other animals and humans. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Develop surveillance systems to identify changing patterns of disease activity in priority geographic areas. Goal 4: Discover the complex interactions and combined effects of exposure to contaminants and pathogens. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Identify how exposure to one class of disease agents (contaminants or pathogens) can make an organism more susceptible to effects from exposure to the other class of disease agents. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Implement interdisciplinary studies that characterize the effects of combined exposure to pathogens and contaminants. Goal 5: Prepare for and respond to the environmental impacts and related health threats of natural and anthropogenic disasters. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Establish a formal interdisciplinary science capability to rapidly assess the environmental health risks associated with disasters. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Enhance methods to anticipate, prepare for, and identify environmental, ecological, and related health impacts of future disasters. This strategy is one of seven USGS science strategies developed concurrently: - Climate and Land Use Change - Core Science Systems - Ecosystems - Energy and Mineral Resources - Environmental Health - Natural Hazards - Water. This strategy describes how USGS will address the highest priority environmental health issues facing the Nation. The ultimate intended outcome of this science strategy is prevention and reduction of adverse impacts to the quality of the environment, the health of our living resources, and human health. Communication with, and receiving input from, partners and stakeholders regarding their science needs is essential for successful implementation of this strategy. It is incumbent on USGS to reach out to all stakeholders to ensure that USGS efforts are focused on the highest priority environmental health issues and that products are provided in the most timely and usable form to all those who can use them. USGS must reach out to the scientific community, internally and externally, to ensure that our efforts are integrated with and take full advantage of the activities of others.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1983

Evaluating environmental and economic consequences of alternative pest management strategies: results of modeling workshops

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) needs a comprehensive method to evaluate the human health and environmental effects of alternative agricultural pest management strategies. This project explored the utility of Adaptive Environmental Assessment (AEA) techniques for meeting this need. The project objectives were to produce models for environmental impact analysis, improve communications, identify research needs and data requirements, and demonstrate a process for resolving conflicts. The project was structured around the construction (in an initial 2 1/2-day workshop) and examination (in a second 2 1/2-day workshop) of a simulation model of a corn agroecosystem. The model conceptualized at the first workshop simulates the effect of corn agrecosystem decisions on crop production, economic returns, and environmental indicators. The model is composed of five interacting submodels: 1) a Production Strategies submodel which makes decisions concerning tillage, planting, fertilizer and pesticide applications, and harvest; 2) a Hydrology/Chemical Transport submodel which represents soil hydrology, erosion, and concentrations of fertilizers and pesticides in the soil, runoff, surface waters, and percolation; 3) a Vegetation submodel which simulates growth of agricultural crops (corns and soybeans) and weeds; 4) a Pests submodel which calculates pest population levels and resulting crop damage; and 5) an Environmental Effects submodel which calculates indicators of potential fish kills, human health effects, and wildlife habitat. The most persistent data gaps encountered in quantifying the model were coefficients to relate environmental consequences to alternative pest management strategies. While the model developed in the project is not yet accurate enough to be used for real-world decisions about the use of pesticides on corn, it does contain the basic structure upon which such a model could be built. More importantly at this stage of development, the project has shown that very complex systems can be modeled in short periods of time and that the process of building such models increases understanding among disciplinary specialists and between diverse institutional interests. This process can be useful to EPA as the agency cooperates with other institutions to meet its responsibilities in less costly ways. Activities at the second 2 1/2-day workshop included a review of the model, incorporation of necessary corrections, simulation of policy scenarios, and examination of techniques to address remaining institutional conflicts. Participants were divided into three groups representing environmental, production or industry, and regulatory interests. Each group developed scenarios that would be most appealing to their particular interest and the scenarios were simulated by the agroecosystem computer model. Negotiators from each of the interest groups decided whether a hypothetical herbicide should be relabeled and if certain restrictions should be imposed on its use. Other participants functioned as experts and consultants on caucus teams. A solution to the hypothetical problem was successfully negotiated. Workshop participants and project staff agreed that the model and processes developed during the project should be used in training students, extension specialists, farmers, researchers, and chemical producers in collaborative problem solving methods. More productive research can be planned, and more realistic models of complex systems can be built in this way. More importantly, greater trust of decisionmakers in computer models, better understanding by technical experts about disciplines other than their own, and improved cooperation between institutional interests can be achieved. This trust, understanding, and cooperation are critical ingredients in solving problems that are too complex to be resolved by independent disciplinary activity and unilateral decision authority.

Report↗
USGS2017

Landsat and agriculture—Case studies on the uses and benefits of Landsat imagery in agricultural monitoring and production

Executive Summary The use of Landsat satellite imagery for global agricultural monitoring began almost immediately after the launch of Landsat 1 in 1972, making agricultural monitoring one of the longest-standing operational applications for the Landsat program. More recently, Landsat imagery has been used in domestic agricultural applications as an input for field-level production management. The enactment of the U.S. Geological Survey’s free and open data policy in 2008 and the launch of Landsat 8 in 2013 have both influenced agricultural applications. This report presents two primary sets of case studies on the applications and benefits of Landsat imagery use in agriculture. The first set examines several operational applications within the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the second focuses on private sector applications for agronomic management. Information on the USDA applications is provided in the U.S. Department of Agriculture Uses of Landsat Imagery for Global and Domestic Agricultural Monitoring section of the report in the following subsections: Estimating Crop Production .—Provides an overview of how Landsat satellite imagery is used to estimate crop production, including the spectral bands most frequently utilized in this application. Monitoring Consumptive Water Use .—Highlights the role of Landsat imagery in monitoring consumptive water use for agricultural production. Globally, a significant amount of agricultural production relies on irrigation, so monitoring water resources is a critical component of agricultural monitoring. National Agricultural Statistics Service —Cropland Data Layer.—Highlights the use of Landsat imagery in developing the annual Cropland Data Layer, a crop-specific land cover classification product that provides information on more than 100 crop categories grown in the United States. Foreign Agricultural Service —Global Agricultural Monitoring.—Highlights Landsat’s role in monitoring global agricultural production. The USDA has been using Landsat imagery to monitor global agricultural production since the launch of Landsat 1 in 1972. Landsat imagery provides objective, global input for a number of USDA agricultural programs and plays an important role in economic and food security forecasting. U.S. Department of Agriculture —Satellite Imagery Archive.—Highlights a number of the experiences of the USDA in acquiring, sharing, and managing moderate resolution imagery to support the diversity of USDA operational programs. Private sector applications using Landsat imagery for agricultural management are discussed in the Landsat Imagery Use and Benefits in Field-Level Agricultural Production Management section of the report in the following subsections: Field-Level Management .—Provides an introduction to what field-level production management is and how it can be applied to agricultural management. This section explores the concept of zone mapping and how Landsat imagery can be used to identify different conditions within a field. The section also provides a case study of zone-mapping software, developed by GK Technology, Inc., that is used by numerous agricultural consultants. Putting Zone Maps to Work .—Highlights several case studies of private agricultural consultants who have been using Landsat imagery to develop zone maps for farmers. Landsat imagery is helping consultants and farmers optimize agricultural inputs, including fertilizer and seed, which leads to higher yield and economic return for the farmer. Increasing Yield .—Highlights the primary benefit of zone mapping using Landsat imagery. Using 5-year market average prices for a number of commodities, this section provides examples of how yield increases translate into higher returns for farmers.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2019

Multi-resource analysis: A proof of concept study of natural resource tradeoffs in the Piceance Basin, Colorado, using the net resources assessment (NetRA) decision support tool

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is developing a multi-resource analysis (MRA) line of products to inform land-use decision makers. Specifically, MRA products will integrate scientific information, include considerations for natural resource interrelations, and quantify the effects of resource management decisions in biophysical, economic, and societal terms. As part of the establishment of the MRA, the USGS, in collaboration with the University of New Mexico, has developed the Net Resources Assessment (NetRA) decision support tool. As a proof of concept analysis, the NetRA was applied to the Piceance basin in Colorado in a hypothetical example to illustrate how resource managers could use the NetRA to consider tradeoffs of natural resources among alternative development plans and land cover patterns within a geographic region. The NetRA is a policy-relevant approach to assess the availability of multiple natural resources. It is an analytical toolset that may be used to examine the spatiotemporal relations between development of energy and mineral resources and delivery of biological natural resources. The NetRA operates at multiple map scales and contains a set of integrated, compatible submodels with specific data requirements for natural resource stocks, engineering economics, biophysical, and ecological data for ecosystem services stocks, market prices, regulations, and nonmarket values. The NetRA includes an explicit process to consider the interdependence between development and conservation, which is a crucial consideration in land-management and land-use decisions. The NetRA is used to estimate an expected net resource value (NRV). The NRV is the expected, present value, economic benefit from the extraction of a resource (for example, natural gas) minus the total cost of production, which is the aggregation of the development, production, and social costs. Social costs include private costs plus any external costs. There can be external social benefits associated with natural gas production, such as increased demand for locally produced goods and increased employment in the local area through backward and forward linkages of natural gas production. The NRV is used to compare development outcomes (scenarios) from a range of exploration and development plans for cumulative energy production. The Piceance basin application of the NetRA uses the NRV to assess the tradeoff between continuous natural gas extraction and the effects to the local populations of Odocoileus hemionus (mule deer) and aquatic species and to consumptive water uses for an area the size and resolution of a USGS energy resource assessment unit. In the proof of concept simulation, the 2.9-square-mile-area of USGS oil and gas assessment unit 50200263 (Piceance basin continuous gas unit of the Mesaverde Total Petroleum System) was gridded into 588 cells. From this area, seven clusters with potential for development and three that cannot be developed were identified; the three clusters that cannot be developed were identified as wilderness study areas, areas of critical environmental concern, and national forests. On the basis of these criteria, there are 118 cells unsuitable for development in the oil and gas assessment unit: 84 are in national forests, 23 are areas of critical environmental concern, and 11 are wilderness study areas. The remaining cells in the oil and gas assessment unit can be developed on both private and public lands. Two scenarios were considered that are distinguished as plan 1 and plan 2. Plan 1 keeps the amount of land disturbance unchanged and limits the number of development locations to 140 grid cells for the production period, which constrains the amount of the energy resources available for development; the plan requires the usage of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) unsuitability criteria. Plan 2 also limits the number of development locations to 140 grid cells for the production period but provides a constant volume of energy production by increasing the density of well pads within the cells. The effects of plan 2 to the NRV when there are five wells per pad and five pads per square mile happen mostly in the first 5 years of development, even though the effects on the population of mule deer continue in later years. This outcome is the result of the upfront development and investment costs and the initial effect to the ecosystem services.

Colorado↗
USGS2015

Fire effects on aquatic ecosystems: An assessment of the current state of the science

Fire is a prevalent feature of many landscapes and has numerous and complex effects on geological, hydrological, ecological, and economic systems. In some regions, the frequency and intensity of wildfire have increased in recent years and are projected to escalate with predicted climatic and landuse changes. In addition, prescribed burns continue to be used in many parts of the world to clear vegetation for development projects, encourage desired vegetation, and reduce fuel loads. Given the prevalence of fire on the landscape, authors of papers in this special series examine the complexities of fire as a disturbance shaping freshwater ecosystems and highlight the state of the science. These papers cover key aspects of fire effects that range from vegetation loss and recovery in watersheds to effects on hydrology and water quality with consequences for communities (from algae to fish), food webs, and ecosystem processes (e.g., organic matter subsidies, nutrient cycling) across a range of scales. The results presented in this special series of articles expand our knowledge of fire effects in different biomes, water bodies, and geographic regions, encompassing aquatic population, community, and ecosystem responses. In this overview, we summarize each paper and emphasize its contributions to knowledge on fire ecology and freshwater ecosystems. This overview concludes with a list of 7 research foci that are needed to further our knowledge of fire effects on aquatic ecosystems, including research on: 1) additional biomes and geographic regions; 2) additional habitats, including wetlands and lacustrine ecosystems; 3) different fire severities, sizes, and spatial configurations; and 4) additional response variables (e.g., ecosystem processes) 5) over long (>5 y) time scales 6) with more rigorous study designs and data analyses, and 7) consideration of the effects of fire management practices and policies on aquatic ecosystems.

Freshwater Science↗
USGS2011

Overview of the ARkStorm scenario

The U.S. Geological Survey, Multi Hazards Demonstration Project (MHDP) uses hazards science to improve resiliency of communities to natural disasters including earthquakes, tsunamis, wildfires, landslides, floods and coastal erosion. The project engages emergency planners, businesses, universities, government agencies, and others in preparing for major natural disasters. The project also helps to set research goals and provides decision-making information for loss reduction and improved resiliency. The first public product of the MHDP was the ShakeOut Earthquake Scenario published in May 2008. This detailed depiction of a hypothetical magnitude 7.8 earthquake on the San Andreas Fault in southern California served as the centerpiece of the largest earthquake drill in United States history, involving over 5,000 emergency responders and the participation of over 5.5 million citizens. This document summarizes the next major public project for MHDP, a winter storm scenario called ARkStorm (for Atmospheric River 1,000). Experts have designed a large, scientifically realistic meteorological event followed by an examination of the secondary hazards (for example, landslides and flooding), physical damages to the built environment, and social and economic consequences. The hypothetical storm depicted here would strike the U.S. West Coast and be similar to the intense California winter storms of 1861 and 1862 that left the central valley of California impassible. The storm is estimated to produce precipitation that in many places exceeds levels only experienced on average once every 500 to 1,000 years. Extensive flooding results. In many cases flooding overwhelms the state’s flood-protection system, which is typically designed to resist 100- to 200-year runoffs. The Central Valley experiences hypothetical flooding 300 miles long and 20 or more miles wide. Serious flooding also occurs in Orange County, Los Angeles County, San Diego, the San Francisco Bay area, and other coastal communities. Windspeeds in some places reach 125 miles per hour, hurricane-force winds. Across wider areas of the state, winds reach 60 miles per hour. Hundreds of landslides damage roads, highways, and homes. Property damage exceeds $ 300 billion, most from flooding. Demand surge (an increase in labor rates and other repair costs after major natural disasters) could increase property losses by 20 percent. Agricultural losses and other costs to repair lifelines, dewater (drain) flooded islands, and repair damage from landslides, brings the total direct property loss to nearly $ 400 billion, of which $ 20 to $ 30 billion would be recoverable through public and commercial insurance. Power, water, sewer, and other lifelines experience damage that takes weeks or months to restore. Flooding evacuation could involve 1.5 million residents in the inland region and delta counties. Business interruption costs reach $ 325 billion in addition to the $ 400 billion property repair costs, meaning that an ARkStorm could cost on the order of $ 725 billion, which is nearly 3 times the loss deemed to be realistic by the ShakeOut authors for a severe southern California earthquake, an event with roughly the same annual occurrence probability. The ARkStorm has several public policy implications: (1) An ARkStorm raises serious questions about the ability of existing federal, state, and local disaster planning to handle a disaster of this magnitude. (2) A core policy issue raised is whether to pay now to mitigate, or pay a lot more later for recovery. (3) Innovative financing solutions are likely to be needed to avoid fiscal crisis and adequately fund response and recovery costs from a similar, real, disaster. (4) Responders and government managers at all levels could be encouraged to conduct risk assessments, and devise the full spectrum of exercises, to exercise ability of their plans to address a similar event. (5) ARkStorm can be a reference point for application of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and California Emergency Management Agency guidance connecting federal, state and local natural hazards mapping and mitigation planning under the National Flood Insurance Plan and Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. (6) Common messages to educate the public about the risk of such an extreme disaster as the ARkStorm scenario could be developed and consistently communicated to facilitate policy formulation and transformation. These impacts were estimated by a team of 117 scientists, engineers, public-policy experts, insurance experts, and employees of the affected lifelines. In many aspects the ARkStorm produced new science, such as the model of coastal inundation. The products of the ARkStorm are intended for use by emergency planners, utility operators, policymakers, and others to inform preparedness plans and to enhance resiliency.

California↗
USGS2013

U.S. Geological Survey environmental health science strategy — Providing environmental health science for a changing world

Executive Summary America has an abundance of natural resources. We have bountiful clean water, fertile soil, and unrivaled national parks, wildlife refuges, and public lands. These resources enrich our lives and preserve our health and wellbeing. These resources have been maintained because of our history of respect for their value and an enduring commitment to their vigilant protection. Awareness of the social, economic, and personal value of the health of our environment is increasing. The emergence of environmentally driven diseases caused by exposure to contaminants and pathogens is a growing concern worldwide. New health threats and patterns of established threats are affected by both natural and anthropogenic changes to the environment. Human activities are key drivers of emerging (new and re-emerging) health threats. Societal demands for land and natural resources, quality of life, and economic prosperity lead to environmental change. Natural earth processes, climate trends, and related climatic events will compound the environmental impact of human activities. These environmental drivers will influence exposure to disease agents, including viral, bacterial, prion, and fungal pathogens, parasites, synthetic chemicals and substances, natural earth materials, toxins, and other biogenic compounds. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) defines environmental health science broadly as the interdisciplinary study of relations among the quality of the physical environment, the health of the living environment, and human health. The interactions among these three spheres are driven by human activities, ecological processes, and natural earth processes; the interactions affect exposure to contaminants and pathogens and the severity of environmentally driven diseases in animals and people. This definition provides USGS with a framework for synthesizing natural science information from across the Bureau and providing it to environmental, natural resource, agricultural, and public health managers. USGS specializes in science at the environment-health interface, by characterizing the processes that affect the interaction among the physical environment, the living environment, and people, and the resulting factors that affect ecological and human exposure to disease agents. The USGS is a Federal science agency with a broad range of natural science expertise relevant to environmental health. USGS provides scientific information and tools as a scientific basis for management and policy decisionmaking. This report describes a 10-year strategy that encompasses the portfolio of USGS environmental health science. It summarizes national environmental health priorities that USGS is best suited to address, and will serve as a strategic framework for USGS environmental health science goals, actions, and outcomes for the next decade. Implementation of this strategy is intended to aid coordination of USGS environmental health activities and to provide a focal point for disseminating information to stakeholders. The “One Health” paradigm advocated by the World Health Organization (WHO; World Health Organization, 2011), and the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA; American Veterinary Medical Association, 2008), among others, is based on a general recognition that the health of humans, animals, and the environment are inextricably linked. Thus, successful efforts to protect that health will require increased interdisciplinary research and increased communication and collaboration among the broader scientific and health community. This strategy is built upon that paradigm.

Circular↗