SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Planning”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 1,171 records · Page 65Linked to original sources

USGS1970

Methods and applications of electrical simulation in ground-water studies in the lower Arkansas and Verdigris River Valleys, Arkansas and Oklahoma

The Arkansas River Multiple-Purpose Plan will provide year-round navigation on the Arkansas River from near its mouth to Muskogee, Okla., and on the Verdigris River from Muskogee to Catoosa, Okla. The altered regimen in the Arkansas and Verdigris Rivers will affect ground-water conditions in the adjacent alluvial aquifers. In 1957 the U.S. Geological Survey and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers entered into a cooperative agreement for a comprehensive ground-water study of the lower Arkansas and Verdigris River valleys. At the request of the Corps of Engineers, the Geological Survey agreed to provide (1) basic ground-water data before, during, and after construction of the Multiple-Purpose Plan and (2) interpretation and projections of postconstruction ground-water conditions. The data collected were used by the Corps of Engineers in preliminary foundation and excavation estimates and by the Geological Survey as the basis for defining the hydrologic properties of, and the ground-water conditions in, the aquifer. The projections of postconstruction ground-water conditions were used by the Corps of Engineers in the planning, design, construction, and operation of the Multiple-Purpose Plan. Analysis and projections of ground-water conditions were made by use of electrical analog models. These models use the analogy between the flow of electricity in a resistance-capacitance circuit and the flow of a liquid in a porous and permeable medium. Verification provides a test of the validity of the analog to perform as the aquifer would, within the range of historic forces. The verification process consists of simulating the action of historic forces which have acted upon the aquifer and of duplicating the aquifer response with the analog. The areal distribution of accretion can be treated as an unknown and can be determined by analog simulation of the piezometric surface in an aquifer. Comparison of accretion with depth to piezometric surface below land surface shows that accretion decreases with decreasing depth to water level. The decrease in accretion is attributed mostly to the increase in evapotranspiration from the aquifer, and where water levels are very near the land surface, to the rejection of recharge. The maximum accretion and the decrease in accretion with the decrease in depth to water are dependent upon the climate and the thickness and lithology of the fine-grained material overlying the aquifer. Dams on the Arkansas and Verdigris Rivers will impose a direct change in water levels in the aquifers adjacent to the rivers. This change will be attenuated by the resultant change in accretion to the aquifer. The analogs of aquifers in the valleys were used to determine the change in ground-water level from preconstruction to postconstruction conditions.

Water Supply Paper↗

USGS2016

Predictive mapping of seabirds, pinnipeds and cetaceans off the Pacific Coast of Washington

About this report This report supports Washington-led marine spatial planning and responsible stewardship of natural and cultural resources by the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary. Washington state agencies and the sanctuary continually seek the best available science to improve management of marine uses and stewardship of resources (Etheridge et al., 2010; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2015a). This report and associated data provide new, state- and sanctuary-requested information on seabird, pinniped, and cetacean distributions. Through spatial planning, information on species distributions can help to identify high-value conservation areas, minimize adverse effects of ocean uses and mitigate impacts of coastal hazards. Correspondingly, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife has already begun to use the maps of predicted relative density presented in this report to identify ecologically important areas off the Pacific Coast of Washington and apply this information to plan for offshore renewable energy development. This is the culmination of three years of work to compile information on seabirds, pinnipeds, and cetaceans, and advance a modeling framework that can integrate data sets and develop accurate predictions of relative density for important species off the Pacific Coast of Washington. Previous reports, which evaluated existing datasets of at-sea observations (Menza et al., 2014; Kracker and Menza, 2015) and presented superseded versions of seabird models (Menza et al., 2015), provided base information for this report. In addition to the maps in this published report, all new seabird, pinniped and cetacean predictions will be made publicly available as digital geospatial data through the National Centers for Environmental Information. This research supports the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Zone Management Program, a voluntary partnership between the federal government and U.S. coastal and Great Lakes states and territories authorized by the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) of 1972 to address national coastal issues. The act provides the basis for protecting, restoring, and responsibly developing our nation’s diverse coastal communities and resources. To meet the goals of the CZMA, the national program takes a comprehensive approach to coastal resource management – balancing the often competing and occasionally conflicting demands of coastal resource use, economic development, and conservation. A wide range of issues are addressed through the program, including coastal development, water quality, public access, habitat protection, energy facility siting, ocean governance and planning, coastal hazards, and climate change. Accurate maps of seabird and marine mammal distributions are an important tool for making informed management decisions that affect all of these issues.

Washington↗

USGS1999

Disease control operations

Individual disease outbreaks have killed many thousands of animals on numerous occasions. Tens of thousands of migratory birds have died in single die-offs with as many as 1,000 birds succumbing in 1 day. The ability to successfully combat such explosive situations is highly dependent on the readiness of field personnel to deal with them. Because many disease agents can spread through wildlife populations very quickly, advance preparation is essential for preventing infected animals from spreading disease to additional species and locations. Carefully thought-out disease contingency plans should be developed as practical working documents for field personnel and updated as necessary. Well-designed plans can prove invaluable in minimizing wildlife losses and the costs associated with disease control activities. Although requirements for disease control operations vary and must be tailored to each situation, all disease contingency planning involves general concepts and basic biological information. This chapter, which is intended to be a practical guide, identifies the major activities and needs of disease control operations, and relates them to disease contingency planning.

Information and Technology Report↗

USGS1987

Disease control operations

Individual disease outbreaks have killed many thousands of animals on numerous occasions. Tens of thousands of migratory birds have died in single die-offs with as many as 1,000 birds succumbing in 1 day. In mammals, individual disease outbreaks have killed hundreds to thousands of animals with, for example, hemorrhagic disease in white-tailed deer, distemper in raccoon, Errington's disease in muskrat, and sylvatic plague in wild rodents. The ability to successfully combat such explosive situations is highly dependent n the readiness of field personnel to deal with them. Because many disease agents can spread though wildlife populations very fast, advance preparation is essential in preventing infected animals from spreading disease to additional species and locations. Carefully though-out disease contingency plans should be developed as practical working documents for field personnel and updated as necessary. Such well-designed plans can prove invaluable in minimizing wildlife losses and costs associated with disease control activities. Although requirements for disease control operations vary and must be tailored to each situation, all disease contingency planning involved general concepts and basic biological information. This chapter, intended as a practical guide, identifies the major activities and needs of disease control operations, and relates them to disease contingency planning.

Report↗

USGS1999

Estimated costs of maintaining a recovered wolf population in agricultural regions of Minnesota

The annual costs of maintaining Minnesota gray wolves (Canis lupus), now numbering about 2,500, under 2 plans are compared: (1) maintaining a population of about 1,400 primarily in the wilderness and semi-wilderness as recommended by the Eastern Timber Wolf Recovery Plan, and (2) allowing wolves to continue colonizing agricultural areas for 5 years after removal from the endangered species list, as recommended by a consensus of wolf stakeholders (Minnesota Wolf Management Roundtable). Under the first plan, each year an estimated 27 farms would suffer livestock losses; wolves would kilt about 3 dogs; 36 wolves would be destroyed; and the cost per wolf in the total population would be \$86. Under the second plan, conservative estimates are that by the year 2005, there would be an estimated 3,500 wolves; each year 94-171 farms would suffer damage; wolves would kill 8-52 dogs; 109-438 wolves would have to be killed for depredation control; and the annual cost averaged over the total population would be \$86 for each of the 1,438 wolves living primarily in the wilderness and an additional \$197 for each wolf outside the wilderness.

Wildlife Society Bulletin↗

USGS1987

Status of worldwide Landsat archive

In cooperation with the International Landsat community, and through the Landsat Technical Working Group (LTWG), NOAA is assembling information about the status of the Worldwide Landsat Archive. During LTWG 9, member nations agreed to participate in a survey of International Landsat data holding and of their archive experiences with Landsat data. The goal of the effort was two-fold; one, to document the Landsat archive to date, and, two, to ensure that specific nations' experience with long-term Landsat archival problems were available to others. The survey requested details such as amount of data held, the format of the archive holdings by Spacecraft/Sensor, and acquisition years; the estimated costs to accumulated process, and replace the data (if necessary); the storage space required, and any member nation's plans that would establish the insurance of continuing quality. As a group, the LTWG nations are concerned about the characteristics and reliability of long-term magnetic media storage. Each nation's experience with older data retrieval is solicited in the survey. This information will allow nations to anticipate and plan for required changes to their archival holdings. Also solicited were reports of any upgrades to a nation's archival system that are currently planned and all results of attempts to reduce archive holdings including methodology, current status, and the planned access rates and product support that are anticipated for responding to future archival usage.

Conference Paper↗

USGS1967

Results of the second phase of the drought-disaster test-drilling program near Morristown, N.J.

The continued drought in northeastern New Jersey through the summer of 1966 with its attendant water-supply problems resulted in an extension of the drought-disaster test-drilling program originally requested by the Office of Emergency Planning on August 30, 1965. Authorization to continue test drilling was fiven by the Office of Emergency Planning on September 26, 1966, with the stipulation that all field work be complete by January 31, 1977. Contractural costs were paid by the Office of Emergency Planning, whereas personnel costs were shared by the U.S. Geological Survey and the New Jersey Department of Conservation and Economic Development, Division of Water Policy and Supply. The work undertaken in 1965 by the Geological Survey was "...to preform the necessary drilling and testing of wells to identify the extent and nature of a reserve ground-water source in the vicinity of the Passaic River near the northern New Jersey metropolitan area." Results of this first phase were made available in the fall of 1966 in Water Resources Circular 16 of the New Jersey Department of Conservation and Economic Development. Three of the five areas tested (figure 1)--two in Parsippany-Troy Hills Township (areas 2 and 4) and one in East Hanover Township (area 1), Morris County--proved capable of providing an aggregate sustained yield of 7.5 million gallons daily (mgd) from wells constructed in sand and gravel deposits. Because significant supplies of ground water for emergency use were located in the first phase of the exploratory test-drilling program, it was though desirable to extend the originally planned studies so as to obtain maximum practicable information on emergency supplies. During this second phase of the investigation, drilling was conducted in 16 sites in Chatham, Madison, and Florham Park Boroughs and in Hanover and East Hanover Townships, Morris County. (See figure 2.) The drilling in Hanover and East Hanover Townships, and part of the drilling done in Florham Park was to explore the availability of large undeveloped ground-water supplies. Drilling in Chatham, Madison, and Florham Park Boroughs was done primarily to determine the extent and continuity of buried valley-fill aquifers, so that a full evaluation of the effects of pumpage from other areas on these already heavily pumped areas could be made. In addition, it was anticipated that the drilling could help in defining the feasibility of artificial recharge of the heavily pumped areas and in the determination of the prospective method of recharge and points of emplacement. Arrangements for easements with landowners, preparation of specifications for well drilling and seismic work, and supervision of well drilling and seismic contracts were all performed by the New Jersey District, Water Resources Division of the Geological Survey. Prior to the test drilling, seismic exploration under contract with Alpine Geophysical Associates of Norwood, N. J. was conducted at five locations in the Chatham-Madison-Florham Park area and at one place in Parsippany-Troy Hills Township. The seismic work was done to determine the most favorable location for a test well at several potential test-well sites and to help in the interpretation of subsurface geology between test sites. Contracts for the drilling of the test holes were awarded during November and drilling commences on November 30. Kaye Well drilling, Inc. of Jackson, N. J. was the recipient of a contract for eight of the test holes, and a second contract was awarded to Rinbrand Well Drilling Co., Inc. of Glen Rock, N. J.--also for eight test holes. Acknowledgment is due to the many public officials of Chatham, Madison, Florham Park, Morristown, and East Hanover Township as well as officials of the Braidburn Corporation and Esso Research and Engineering Co., who cooperated by making their lands available for exploration.

New Jersey↗

USGS2013

Science-based management of public lands in southern Nevada

Landmark legislation provides guiding principles for land management planning in southern Nevada and the rest of the United States. Such legislation includes, but is not limited to, the Forest Service Organic Administration Act of 1897 (16 U.S>C. 473-478, 479-482 and 551), National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (U.S.C. Title 16, Secs. 1-4). Wilderness Act 1964 (P.L.88-577), National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (P.L. 91-190), Endangered Species Act of 1973 (P.L. 91-205), National Forest Management Act of of 1976 (P.L. 94-588), and Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (P.L. 94-579). The acts establishing congressionally designated areas within southern Nevada, such as Lake Mead National Recreation Area, Spring Mountains National Restoration Area, and Desert National Wildlife Refuge, also contain guidelines for the management of these lands. These documents variously require preservation of natural and cultural resource and wilderness character, protection of species, and prevention of undesirable environmental effects from land management actions. These requirements must be met while allowing for multiple "uses" of certain public lands (e.g. recreation, ranching, resources extraction, renewable energy development, etc.) to the degree that they do no threaten preservation, protection, and prevention goals,. many considerations some into play in the development and implementation for land management plans and actions. The planning process requires a balancing act that sometimes pit one need or priority against another. When priorities can trump other needs can prioritized and receive disproportionate consideration. Overall, the management of public lands is a very complicated and sometime contentious process. Science provides an objective way to help weigh quantifiable information and draw conclusions about the effects of past and potential future land management policies, decisions, and actions. When effectively integrated into adaptive management, science-based information can reduce uncertainties, increase knowledge, and improve decision making. However, the specific science information needed for effective management is often lacking or difficult to access or interpret. Science is typically reported in scientific journals as discrete units describing individual studies with other scientists as the primary audience. Translations of these studies an synthesis or multiple studies into formats that can be readily used in land management planning efforts are often lacking. Identifying and articulating the highest priority science and research needs is one of the primary purposes of the Southern Nevada Agency Partnership (SNAP; http://www.SNAP.gov) Science and Research Team (chapter 1; Turner and others 2009). The SNAP Science and Research Strategy (Strategy) calls for a synthesis report to be written every 5 years summarizing the state of knowledge, information gaps and management implications of scientific information as it relates to the SNAP Strategy goals (Turner and others 2009). This General Technical Report serves as the first SNAP Science and Research Synthesis Report (Synthesis Report) commissioned by the Science and Research Team. The Synthesis Report is mostly based on information form the peer-reviewed scientific literature, and is itself peer reviewed and constitutes a new contribution to the scientific literature. This final chapter addresses Sub-goal 2.3, which is to manage current and future authorized southern Nevada land uses in a manner that balances public need and ecosystem sustainability, and Sub-goal 2.5, which is to promote an effective conservation education and interpretation program to improve the quality of resources and enhance public use and enjoyment of southern Nevada public lands. It summarizes information form the previous chapters on what scientific information is known currently and what remains largely unknown, and it discusses how science can be used to make future management decisions that balances public needs and ecosystem sustainability.

Nevada↗

USGS1991

On forming an Ornithological Council

It has begun to bother me that the ornithological societies seem to be playing an extremely minor role in anything to do with conserving, preserving, or salvaging the environment. We realize-or we tell each other that we do-that birds are an important part of the world's ecosystems, that they can often serve as indicator species of environmental problems, that what affects bird populations can and will eventually affect the human population. But as organizations, we lack a mechanism to tell anyone other than ourselves about our concerns or how the knowledge our study produces can be used to help efforts to protect either the birds themselves or the environment of which they and we are parts. We can, and some do, share our concerns and knowledge individually, but we have no effective way to say that 5,000 ornithologists think that "Plan A is a good idea" or "Plan B could lead to declines in bird populations" or even that "Plan C would have a very bad (or good) effect on the scientific study of birds that is needed to know whether Plans A and B are good." Our current mechanism for action is pretty much restricted to adopting resolutions saying, in effect, "We think you shouldn't have done that" or "We wish you would do something." Even the timing of this mechanism leaves much to be desired if we really intend to have any effect.

The Auk↗

USGS2009

Acid neutralizing capacity and leachate results for igneous rocks, with associated carbon contents of derived soils, Animas River AML site, Silverton, Colorado

Mine planning efforts have historically overlooked the possible acid neutralizing capacity (ANC) that local igneous rocks can provide to help neutralize acidmine drainage. As a result, limestone has been traditionally hauled to mine sites for use in neutralizing acid drainage. Local igneous rocks, when used as part of mine life-cycle planning and acid mitigation strategy, may reduce the need to transport limestone to mine sites because these rocks can contain acid neutralizing minerals. Igneous hydrothermal events often introduce moderately altered mineral assemblages peripheral to more intensely altered rocks that host metal-bearing veins and ore bodies. These less altered rocks can contain ANC minerals (calcite-chlorite-epidote) and are referred to as a propylitic assemblage. In addition, the carbon contents of soils in areas of new mining or those areas undergoing restoration have been historically unknown. Soil organic carbon is an important constituent to characterize as a soil recovery benchmark that can be referred to during mine cycle planning and restoration. This study addresses the mineralogy, ANC, and leachate chemistry of propylitic volcanic rocks that host polymetallic mineralization in the Animas River watershed near the historical Silverton, Colorado, mining area. Acid titration tests on volcanic rocks containing calcite (2 – 20 wt %) and chlorite (6 – 25 wt %), have ANC ranging from 4 – 146 kg/ton CaCO3 equivalence. Results from a 6-month duration, kinetic reaction vessel test containing layered pyritic mine waste and underlying ANC volcanic rock (saturated with deionized water) indicate that acid generating mine waste (pH 2.4) has not overwhelmed the ANC of propylitic volcanic rocks (pH 5.8). Sequential leachate laboratory experiments evaluated the concentration of metals liberated during leaching. Leachate concentrations of Cu-Zn-As-Pb for ANC volcanic rock are one-to-three orders of magnitude lower when compared to leached solution from mine waste used in the kinetic reaction vessel test. This finding suggests that mine waste and not ANC rock may generate the majority of leachable metals in a field scenario. The organic carbon content of naturally reclaimed soils derived from weathering of propylitically-altered andesite was determined in catchments where ANC studies were initiated. Soils were found to have total carbon concentrations (TOC) that exceed global average soil TOC abundances by as much as 1.5 – 5 times. These data support an environmental management system involving use of ANC rocks as part of life-cycle mine planning to reduce post-mine closure acid mitigation measures. Carbon contents of undisturbed soils in mined catchments can possibly be used to validate post-reclamation success and help quantify carbon sequestration for CO2 emission offset trading as carbon markets mature.

Colorado↗

USGS1987

Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge land cover mapping project user's guide

Title III of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA, 1980) established the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge (YFNWR). Section 304 of the Act requires the Secretary of Interior to "prepare, and from time to time revise, a comprehensive conservation plan" for the refuge. Before developing a plan for the refuge, the Secretary shall "identify and describe--a) the populations and habitats of the fish and wildlife resources of the refuge; b) the special values of the refuge as well as any other archeological, cultural, ecological, geological , historical, palentological, scenic, or wilderness value of the refuge; c) areas within the refuge that are suitable for use as administrative sites or visitor facilities...; d) present the potential requirements for access with respect to the refuge...; and e) significant problems which may adversely affect the populations and habitats of fish and wildlife identified and described..." (ANILCA, 1980). Vegetation, water, and terrain (elevation, slope, and aspect) are the components of habitat and can be used in the determination of the above requirements. The U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) has the responsibility for collecting the resource information to address the research, management, development and planning requirements identified in Section 304. Because of the brief period provided by the Act for data collection, habitat mapping, and habitat assessment, the USFWS in cooperation with the U.S. Geological Survey's EROS Field Office, used digital Landsat multispectral scanner (MSS) data and digital terrain data to produce land cover and terrain maps. A computer assisted digital analysis of Landsat MSS data was used because coverage by aerial photographs was incomplete for much of the refuge and because the level of detail obtained from Landsat data was adequate to meet most USFWS research, management and planning needs. Relative cost and time requirements were also factors in the decision to use the digital analysis approach.

Alaska↗

USGS2005

National parks and protected areas: Appoaches for balancing social, economic, and ecological values

The balance of nature in any strict sense has been upset long ago…The only option we have is to create a new balance objectively determined for each area in accordance with the intended use of that area.” --Aldo Leopold, 1927, in a letter to the Superintendent of Glacier National Park The planning and management staff of state/national parks and protected areas face a complex set of management problems and an uncertain future. Today, internal and external forces are combining with changes in management philosophy (from a species to an ecosystem focus) to create a new direction in natural resources management. National Parks and Protected Areas: Approaches for Balancing Social, Economic and Ecological Values is peerless in its unified treatment of the issues surrounding this subject. From decision-making for planning and management to the principles of ecology and economics, this text examines the analytical methods, information technologies, and planning and management problems associated with protected area planning and management. Protected area managers and students in undergraduate and graduate courses in natural resource management will appreciate this highly readable book.

Book↗

USGS2016

The Chief Joseph Hatchery Program 2013 Annual Report

The Chief Joseph Hatchery is the fourth hatchery obligated under the Grand Coulee Dam/Dry Falls project, originating in the 1940s. Leavenworth, Entiat, and Winthrop National Fish Hatcheries were built and operated as mitigation for salmon blockage at Grand Coulee Dam, but the fourth hatchery was not built, and the obligation was nearly forgotten. After the Colville Tribes successfully collaborated with the United States to resurrect the project, planning of the hatchery began in 2001 and construction was completed in 2013. The monitoring program began in 2012 and adult Chinook Salmon were brought on station for the first time in June 2013. BPA is the primary funding source for CJH, and the Mid-Columbia PUDs (Douglas, Grant and Chelan County) have entered into cost-share agreements with the tribes and BPA in order to meet some of their mitigation obligations. The CJH production level was set at 60% in 2013 in order to train staff and test hatchery facility systems during the first year of operation. Leavenworth National Fish Hatchery (LNFH) provided 422 Spring Chinook broodstock in June, 2013; representing the official beginning of CJH operations. In July and August the CCT used a purse seine vessel to collect 814 summer/fall Chinook as broodstock that were a continuation and expansion of the previous Similkameen Pond program. In-hatchery survival for most life stages exceeded survival targets and, as of April 2014, the program was on track to exceed the 60% production target for its start-up year. The CJH monitoring project collected field data to determine Chinook population status, trend, and hatchery effectiveness centered on five major activities; 1) rotary screw traps (juvenile outmigration, natural-origin smolt PIT tagging) 2) beach seine (naturalorigin smolt PIT tagging) 3) lower Okanogan adult fish pilot weir (adult escapement, proportion of hatchery-origin spawners [pHOS], broodstock) 4) spawning ground surveys (redd and carcass surveys)(viable salmonid population [VSP] parameters) 5) eDNA collection (VSP parameter—distribution/spatial structure). Adult summer/fall Chinook spawning escapement in 2013 was estimated to be 8,193, with more than 6,227 natural-origin spawners, which exceeded the recent five year and long term averages. The values for pHOS (0.24) and proportion of natural influence (PNI) (0.79) in 2013 exceeded the objectives (0.67), but the five year averages fell short of the goals (0.39 and 0.62, respectively). An Annual Program Review (APR) was held in March, 2014 to share hatchery production and monitoring data, review the salmon forecast for the upcoming year, and develop action plans for the hatchery, selective harvest, and monitoring projects. Based on a strong pre-season forecast of 67,500 Upper Columbia summer/fall Chinook, the plan for 2014 is to operate the hatchery at full program levels of 2 million summer/fall Chinook and 900,000 spring Chinook. To maximize PNI, broodstock for the integrated program should Chief Joseph Hatchery Program 2013 Annual Report 3 be 100% natural-origin broodstock (NOB) and CCT should plan to harvest their full allocation with the selective harvest program removing as many adult hatchery Chinook as possible with the purse seine, the weir, and at the hatchery ladder.

Report↗

USGS2016

Circumpolar biodiversity monitoring program (CBMP): Coastal expert workshop meeting report

The Coastal Expert Workshop, which took place in Ottawa, Canada from March 1 to 3, 2016, initiated the development of the Arctic Coastal Biodiversity Monitoring Plan (Coastal Plan). Meeting participants, including northern residents, representatives from industry, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), academia, and government regulators and agencies from across the circumpolar Arctic, discussed current biodiversity monitoring efforts, key issues facing biodiversity in Arctic coastal areas, and collectively identified monitoring indicators, or Focal Ecosystem Components (FECs). On February 29, the day before the workshop, a full day was allocated to Traditional Knowledge (TK) holders to meet and elucidate how this important knowledge can be included in the process of building the Coastal Plan and monitoring biodiversity in Arctic coastal areas, along with scientific data and variables. This document provides 1) background information about the Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Programme and the Coastal Expert Monitoring Group, 2) overviews on workshop presentations and breakout sessions, and 3) details regarding outcomes of the workshop that will inform the drafting of the Coastal Plan.

Conference Paper↗

USGS1970

Let's Sing 'Auld Lang Syne' for the Upper Brandywine: Or, to continue with Burns, how the best laid environmental schemes of men "gang aft a-gley"

Perhaps the most lamentable mistake that one can make is to be right too soon. This was the story of the Brandywine Plan, an attempt to organize local people for the permanent protection of the environmental amenities of their own land. The Upper East Branch of Brandywine Creek drains a rolling basin of farms, fields, woodlands, and a sprinkling of residential areas. Because it lies at the far edge of the commuting range to the population centers of Philadelphia and Wilmington, the basin's natural beauty has barely been touched by the blight of suburban sprawl. The waters of its streams are clear; its ample woodlands and fields are filled with wildlife. Driving slowly through the basin's winding roads and across its narrow bridges evokes the feeling of a pastoral painting, of the ideal landscape of rural eastern America. For two years, I had the privilege of working closely with a group preparing a land plan for the Brandywine area. The plan was designed to offer the inhabitants of the basin a feasible way to preserve forever the natural qualities of their region from the inevitable wave of urbanization. A report in Science magazine called it the perfect plan that failed.

Natural History↗

USGS2012

Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Task Force---Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Science Assessment and Needs

The Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Task Force (GCERTF) was established by Executive Order 13554 as a result of recommendations from “America’s Gulf Coast: A Long-term Recovery Plan after the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill” by Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus (Mabus Report). The GCERTF consists of members from 11 Federal agencies and representatives from each State bordering the Gulf of Mexico. The GCERTF was charged to develop a holistic, long-term, science-based Regional Ecosystem Restoration Strategy for the Gulf of Mexico. Federal and State agencies staffed the GCERTF with experts in fields such as policy, budgeting, and science to help develop the Strategy. The Strategy was built on existing authorities and resources and represents enhanced collaboration and a recognition of the shared responsibility among Federal and State governments to restore the Gulf Coast ecosystem. In this time of severe fiscal constraints, Task Force member agencies and States are committed to establishing shared priorities and working together to achieve them. As part of this effort, three staffers, one National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) scientist and two U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists, created and led a Science Coordination Team (SCT) to guide scientific input into the development of the Gulf of Mexico Regional Ecosystem Restoration Strategy. The SCT leads from the GCERTF coordinated more than 70 scientists from the Federal and State Task Force member agencies to participate in development of a restoration-oriented science document focused on the entire Gulf of Mexico, from inland watersheds to the deep blue waters. The SCT leads and scientists were organized into six different working groups based on expanded goals from the Mabus Report: Coastal habitats are healthy and resilient. Living coastal and marine resources are healthy, diverse, and sustainable. Coastal communities are adaptive and resilient. Storm buffers are sustainable. Inland habitats and watersheds are managed to help support healthy and sustainable Gulf of Mexico ecosystems. Offshore environments are healthy and well managed Each working group was charged with defining their specific goal, describing the current conditions related to that goal (for example, the status of coastal habitats in the Gulf of Mexico), providing highlevel activities needed to further define and achieve the goal, with associated outcome-based performance indicators, and identifying the scientific gaps in understanding to accomplish the goal and implement the recommended activities. The overall scientific assessment reveals that the Gulf of Mexico ecosystem continues to suffer from extensive degradation, and action is necessary to develop a healthy, resilient, and sustainable Gulf of Mexico ecosystem. The six groups also were tasked with outlining the necessary monitoring, modeling, and research needs to aid in achieving the goals. Recognizing that (1) the scientific needs (monitoring, modeling, and research) overlap among many of the goals, and (2) an overarching scientific framework could be developed to implement the necessary science in support of the Strategy, a seventh group was created with several members from each of the original six working groups. This seventh group compiled all of the cross-cutting monitoring, modeling, and research needs previously identified by the individual groups. These scientific requirements are found in Chapter 5 of this document. The seventh group also has developed a Science Plan, outlined in Chapter 6. The Science Plan provides the basic science infrastructure to support the overall Gulf restoration program and Strategy. The Science Plan allows for the development of an iterative and flexible approach to adaptive management and decision-making related to restoration projects based on sound science that includes monitoring, modeling, and research. Taken in its entirety, this document helps to articulate the current state of the system and the critical science needs to support effective restoration of the Gulf of Mexico resources that have been trending towards decline for decades.

Report↗

USGS2015

2014-2015 Partnership accomplishments report on joint activities: National Gap Analysis Program and LANDFIRE

The intended target audience for this document initially is management and project technical specialist and scientists involved in the Gap Analysis Program (GAP) and the Landscape Fire and Resource Management Planning Tools - (LANDFIRE) program to help communicate coordination activities to all involved parties. This document is also intended to give background information in other parts of the USGS and beyond, although some details given are relatively oriented to management of the respective programs. Because the Gap Analysis Program (GAP) and the Landscape Fire and Resource Management Planning Tools - LANDFIRE programs both rely on characterizations of land cover using similar scales and resolutions, the programs have been coordinating their work to improve scientific consistency and efficiency of production. Initial discussions and informal sharing of ideas and work began in 2008. Although this collaboration was fruitful, there was no formal process for reporting results, plans, or outstanding issues, nor was there any formally-defined coordinated management team that spanned the two programs. In 2012, leadership from the two programs agreed to strengthen the coordination of their respective work efforts. In 2013 the GAP and LANDFIRE programs developed an umbrella plan of objectives and components related to three mutual focus areas for the GAP and LANDFIRE collaboration for the years 2013 and 2014 (GAP/LANDFIRE 2013). The evolution of this partnership resulted in the drafting of an inter-program Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in 2014. This MOU identified three coordination topics relevant to the two programs participating at this point in the MOU history: Vegetation mapping Disturbance classes Formal quality assessment

Report↗

USGS2017

Developing an effective Agassiz's Desert Tortoise monitoring program: Final report to the Coachella Valley Conservation Commission

Agassiz’s desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) is a conservation-reliant species with populations north and west of the Colorado River protected as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (Averill-Murray et al. 2012). Since it was listed under this category in 1990, a great deal has been learned about the natural history of the species, and it is now one of the best-studied turtles in the United States (Lovich and Ennen 2013). However, the accumulated body of scientific data available for the species has not yet been translated into recovery or delisting of the species. Successful conservation of any species requires knowledge of their natural history and how vital rates affect their ability to maintain stable populations in the face of natural and anthropogenic stresses. Agassiz’s desert tortoises occur from southwestern Utah to near the Mexican border in California – a distance of over 450 km – but population densities vary greatly across this immense landscape (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2015). Tortoises occur in the Sonoran Desert of California, including the eastern and western ends of the Coachella Valley, where it is one of 27 species covered under the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and Natural Community Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP/NCCP). The southern portion of Joshua Tree National Park (JTNP) lies within this 1.1 million acre planning area, and was predicted to be an area of low-density tortoise populations using habitat suitability modeling (Barrows 2011). JTNP is near the southern distributional limit of G. agassizii, yet very little has been published regarding the ecology of tortoises in the Sonoran Desert of California. Reproductive output is an important gross measure of the ability of a population to persist. When integrated with data on fertility and survivorship, this information forms a foundation for assessing population status and formulating effective management strategies (e.g., Congdon et al. 1993, 1994), especially for imperiled species. One aspect of the biology of G. agassizii that has been particularly well-studied is reproductive output. However, most of what we know about this topic comes from research in the Mojave Desert portion of the species’ range (Ernst and Lovich 2009). Comparatively little has been published on the reproductive ecology of populations living in the Sonoran Desert ecosystem of California. Publications by Lovich et al. (1999, 2011, 2012, 2014, 2015) constitute the main body of literature on desert tortoise reproductive ecology in the Sonoran Desert of California, with one study population located at the western end of the CVMSHCP/NCCP area. Collecting data on Agassiz’s desert tortoise ecology in the Sonoran Desert ecosystem is important due to significant differences between the two adjacent desert ecosystems, especially the timing and amounts of annual precipitation, and their potential effects on reproductive output (e.g., Lovich et al. 5 2015). There are also differences in the vulnerability of tortoises to the effects of a warming, drying climate between the two deserts (Barrows 2011; Zylstra et al. 2012). The overall goal of this study was to collect data on demography, reproductive output, and genetic affinities at a study site in the Sonoran Desert portion of JTNP in the eastern end of the CVMSHCP/NCCP area. Specific objectives included: 1) Collect data to establish baselines on tortoise populations and/or their habitat suitability in core habitat within the CVNCCP area, including biotic and abiotic variables affecting persistence of tortoise populations; 2) Compare and contrast with data collected on desert tortoises at USGS/BLM study site near Palm Springs over 16 years; 3) Support long-term modeling efforts needed to determine tortoise population viability; 4) Refine modeled relationships with identified threats such as fire, invasive species and climate change; and 5) Prioritize adaptive management needs for the desert tortoise in and beyond the CVNCCP area. The data from this study will aid in determining baseline estimates of the desert tortoise population size within the planning area as well as establish a marked population of Agassiz’s desert tortoises for future monitoring. Data will be integrated with habitat modeling in order to refine model output. Genetic data will be collected on both the north and south sides of Interstate 10 to determine the potential effects of habitat fragmentation and genetic mixing. Analyses are ongoing and results beyond those presented in this report will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals following inclusion of additional data collected on the south side of Shavers Valley in 2017-2018.

Report↗