SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Environment and Planning A”

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 127 records · Page 7Linked to original sources

USGS2009

Options for national parks and reserves for adapting to climate change

Past and present climate has shaped the valued ecosystems currently protected in parks and reserves, but future climate change will redefine these conditions. Continued conservation as climate changes will require thinking differently about resource management than we have in the past; we present some logical steps and tools for doing so. Three critical tenets underpin future management plans and activities: (1) climate patterns of the past will not be the climate patterns of the future; (2) climate defines the environment and influences future trajectories of the distributions of species and their habitats; (3) specific management actions may help increase the resilience of some natural resources, but fundamental changes in species and their environment may be inevitable. Science-based management will be necessary because past experience may not serve as a guide for novel future conditions. Identifying resources and processes at risk, defining thresholds and reference conditions, and establishing monitoring and assessment programs are among the types of scientific practices needed to support a broadened portfolio of management activities. In addition to the control and hedging management strategies commonly in use today, we recommend adaptive management wherever possible. Adaptive management increases our ability to address the multiple scales at which species and processes function, and increases the speed of knowledge transfer among scientists and managers. Scenario planning provides a broad forward-thinking framework from which the most appropriate management tools can be chosen. The scope of climate change effects will require a shared vision among regional partners. Preparing for and adapting to climate change is as much a cultural and intellectual challenge as an ecological challenge.

Environmental Management↗

USGS2011

Geospatial characteristics of Florida's coastal and offshore environments: Coastal habitats, artificial reefs, wrecks, dumping grounds, harbor obstructions and offshore sand resources

The Geospatial Characteristics GeoPDF of Florida's Coastal and Offshore Environments is a comprehensive collection of geospatial data describing the political boundaries and natural resources of Florida. This interactive map provides spatial information on bathymetry, sand resources, coastal habitats, artificial reefs, shipwrecks, dumping grounds, and harbor obstructions. The map should be useful to coastal resource managers and others interested in marine habitats and submerged obstructions of Florida's coastal region. In particular, as oil and gas explorations continue to expand, the map may be used to explore information regarding sensitive areas and resources in the State of Florida. Users of this geospatial database will have access to synthesized information in a variety of scientific disciplines concerning Florida's coastal zone. This powerful tool provides a one-stop assembly of data that can be tailored to fit the needs of many natural resource managers. The map was originally developed to assist the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement (BOEMRE) and coastal resources managers with planning beach restoration projects. The BOEMRE uses a systematic approach in planning the development of submerged lands of the Continental Shelf seaward of Florida's territorial waters. Such development could affect the environment. BOEMRE is required to ascertain the existing physical, biological, and socioeconomic conditions of the submerged lands and estimate the impact of developing these lands. Data sources included the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, BOEMRE, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Florida Geographic Data Library, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Florida Natural Areas Inventory, and the State of Florida, Bureau of Archeological Research. Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) compliant metadata are provided as attached xml files for all geographic information system (GIS) layers.

Florida↗

USGS2011

Geospatial characteristics of Florida's coastal and offshore environments: Distribution of important habitats for coastal and offshore biological resources and offshore sand resources

The Geospatial Characteristics GeoPDF of Florida's Coastal and Offshore Environments is a comprehensive collection of geospatial data describing the political boundaries and natural resources of Florida. This interactive map provides spatial information on bathymetry, sand resources, and locations of important habitats (for example, Essential Fish Habitats (EFH), nesting areas, strandings) for marine invertebrates, fish, reptiles, birds, and marine mammals. The map should be useful to coastal resource managers and others interested in marine habitats and submerged obstructions of Florida's coastal region. In particular, as oil and gas explorations continue to expand, the map can be used to explore information regarding sensitive areas and resources in the State of Florida. Users of this geospatial database will have access to synthesized information in a variety of scientific disciplines concerning Florida's coastal zone. This powerful tool provides a one-stop assembly of data that can be tailored to fit the needs of many natural resource managers. The map was originally developed to assist the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement (BOEMRE) and coastal resources managers with planning beach restoration projects. The BOEMRE uses a systematic approach in planning the development of submerged lands of the Continental Shelf seaward of Florida's territorial waters. Such development could affect the environment. BOEMRE is required to ascertain the existing physical, biological, and socioeconomic conditions of the submerged lands and estimate the impact of developing these lands. Data sources included the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, BOEMRE, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Florida Geographic Data Library, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Florida Natural Areas Inventory, and the State of Florida, Bureau of Archeological Research. Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) compliant metadata are provided as attached xml files for all geographic information system (GIS) layers.

Florida↗

USGS2024

Realizing the potential of eDNA biodiversity monitoring tools in the marine environment with application to offshore renewable energy

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) researches the biological diversity and distribution of species to support management, conservation, and resource use decisions. USGS scientists advance detection and monitoring technologies to assess changes in fish and wildlife populations, biodiversity, and the health of ecosystems. The United States is planning to install 30 gigawatts of offshore marine and wind energy by 2030. However, the effects on fish and wildlife and their habitats are not well understood. The USGS is a leader in the field of eDNA technologies and has helped advance robotic eDNA samplers, has extensive experience working in the offshore environment, and has developed novel and actionable statistical methods and standards for eDNA monitoring applications. This fact sheet presents key eDNA research and development advances needed for realizing the potential of eDNA biodiversity monitoring tools in the marine environment and applying eDNA monitoring to offshore renewable energy development. New and cost-effective tools for measuring changes in biodiversity in response to offshore renewable energy development can help to inform natural resource management and project planning and permitting decisions.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2020

Fate and behavior tools related to inland spill response—Workshop on the U.S. Geological Survey’s role in Federal science support

Executive Summary There is a growing body of tools available for science support for determining the fate and behavior of industrial and agricultural chemicals that are rapidly injected (“spilled”) into aquatic environments. A 2-day roundtable-style workshop was held by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in Middleton, Wisconsin, in December 2017 to describe and explore existing Federal science support for spill fate and behavior tools used for inland spills, ongoing and new fate and behavior studies, and science gaps in planning and response tools as part of the USGS Midcontinent Region’s efforts to include spill response as part of its strategic plans. A total of 28 attendees representing a variety of Federal, State, and regional entities presented on programs and tools used in various aspects of spill response. Most programs and tools discussed were for spills in riverine environments but tools and applications for spills in lakes, on land surfaces, in urban storm sewer networks, and groundwater also were discussed. A primary workshop focus was to facilitate communication and increase potential for future collaboration among agencies for inland spill science support. The role and need for more USGS science support within the inland spill community was discussed. Enhanced communication is needed within the USGS and the U.S. Department of the Interior science programs, as well as within and among other agencies that do emergency planning and response. A main conclusion of the workshop was that there are untapped resources of the USGS outlined in the agency’s science strategy that could strengthen science support for fate and behavior tools in inland areas, especially in the Upper Mississippi River, Ohio River, and Great Lakes Basins where large freshwater resources overlap with dense corridors of oil and hazardous substances, with transportation networks, and with large populations centers. Fate and behavior tools are being developed quickly for inland spill response by multiple Federal agencies in partnership with local and regional entities. Applicability of these tools ranges from planning and preparedness, to the early stages of spill response for protection of human life and property, and to the application of monitoring and models to assess the long-term consequences of spills. Key findings from the workshop, with an emphasis on potential further development of USGS science support, include the following: •The national and regional response to spills occurs within an established system that must be respected by all parties involved in spill response. The USGS’s role is to support spill responders who are physically working at a spill scene, deploying booms and using other efforts to contain and recover spilled materials. •The USGS has tools that have been used throughout spill response operations, from early response to recovery and restoration. Developing a more formal role for the USGS to participate in science support for inland spills on a consistent basis is a desired outcome. This will require the USGS to improve internal and external communication and would be best accomplished by assigning one or more coordinator positions within the agency to plan and oversee USGS spill-response efforts. More involvement of the USGS on National and Regional Response Teams, especially in the realm of the Science and Technology Subcommittees, will gofar in increasing external communication and integration of fate and behavior tools. •Rapid response to spills requires modeling and mapping of plumes and associated time-of-travel estimation for a range of stream sizes across the United States. Many existing models use USGS streamgage data and the USGS National Hydrography Dataset. Nearly all existing models would benefit from updated linkages to USGS StreamStats and its soon-to-be released time-of-travel estimates,real-time velocity, stream morphology, and slope data. Integrating USGS tools with those from other agencies could be done to better serve the larger spill response community. • A problem is that existing models to rapidly predict plume extent, as well as more followup/longer-term fate and transport models, can be unknown or unavailable to spill responders. Thus, creating and strengthening linkages among USGS scientists skilled at using these tools is needed to support spill response with the on-scene responders. • Research for inland spill fate and behavior done outside of an immediate spill response can assist with spill planning and preparedness by (1) revealing sites likely to experience spills in the future (high-risk sites) and (2) understanding how a spilled substance might behave under a range of environmental conditions. However, USGS research on this topic has been scarce and subject to funding availability. Examples include the 2010 Line 6B Spill release into the Kalamazoo River in Michigan, where the USGS provided science support for a variety of fate and behavior tools for stream and impoundment environments. A long-term research site in Bemidji, Minnesota, provides important insights into transformations and longevity of spilled oil in groundwater and groundwater-surface water interactions. • Linking stream models to other components of this inland environment, including groundwater, overland flow, and karst, is needed. Stream network data can be linked to underground conduits such as storm sewers and karst groundwater systems. Stream models can also be linked with geospatial data such as that contained in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s interactive mapping tools. • The USGS is uniquely qualified to collect water-quality data during spills in the United States because of its many geographically dispersed water science centers, its knowledge and preparedness for flood measurement and documentation, and its cadre of skilled water-quality employees. Rapid-deployment gages, used for floods, could also be used for spills if they included spill-specific sensors. Coordinated expertise at USGS water and environmental science centers can be used for monitoring spill effects and for assessing risk to water quality and ecological communities. • Scientists at the USGS have proven capable of providing science coordination and technical assistance within the Incident Command Structure at the request of the lead on-scene coordinator. This external coordination, as well as internal communication within USGS Water, Hazards, and Ecosystems Mission Areas, could be improved by establishing and naming a USGS spills coordinator. Scott Morlock, Jo Ellen Hinck, and Faith Fitzpatrick are currently (2017) serving in informal coordination roles in addition to their traditional duties.

Open-File Report↗

USGS1994

Optimization of wide-angle seismic signal-to-noise ratios and P-wave transmission in Kenya

In previous refraction and wide-angle reflection experiments in the Kenya Rift there were problems with poor signal-noise ratios which made good seismic interpretation difficult. Careful planning and preparation for KRISP 90 has substantially overcome these problems and produced excellent seismic sections in a difficult environment. Noise levels were minimized by working, as far as possible, at times of the day when conditions were quiet, while source signals were optimized by using dispersed charges in water where it was available and waterfilled boreholes in most cases where it was not. Seismic coupling at optimum depth in water has been found to be more than 100 times greater than it is in a borehole in dry loosely compacted material. Allowing for the source coupling, a very marked difference has been found between the observation ranges in the rift and those on the flanks, where the observation ranges are greater. These appear to indicate a significant difference in seismic transmission through the two types of crust.

Tectonophysics↗

USGS1981

Subsurface injection of liquid waste in Florida, United States of America

In 1979, liquid waste was injected into the subsurface of Florida by 10 injection systems at an aggregate average rate of 165,000 m 3 /d. All the systems inject into carbonate rocks that contain salty water. Extensive precautions are taken in the construction of the injection wells and in the monitoring of their operation to provide assurance that overlying and laterally contiguous freshwater resources do not become contaminated with either the injected waste or the saltwater displaced by the waste. Several concerns relating to the effectiveness of the confining bed above the injection zone for containing the injected wastes have arisen over the years. These concerns accentuate the value of a well-planned and implemented monitoring program from which one can evaluate the potential impact of waste injection on the subsurface environment.

Florida↗

USGS2025

Opportunities to better integrate inland fish and fisheries in multilateral environmental agreements

Inland fish and fisheries are globally important to environmental function and human services, yet their persistent lack of recognition in global agreements, especially multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), may hinder progress towards biodiversity conservation and human well-being. The connection between inland fish, fisheries, and their ecosystems means that addressing the needs of fish directly offers opportunities to meet multiple global commitments and provide indicators of progress towards many global goals. In this perspective, we highlight opportunities to better integrate inland fish and fisheries into MEAs, specifically the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Convention on Wetlands (commonly known as the Ramsar Convention), Convention on Conservation of Migratory Species (CMS), Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), and World Heritage Convention (WHC). Greater attention on inland fish and fisheries through MEAs could help ensure more holistic planning, investment, and conservation of these important fish and fisheries, their biodiversity, the essential resources they provision, and the environments they inhabit.

Environmental Science & Policy↗

USGS1974

Water resources of Wisconsin: Lower Wisconsin River basin

This report describes the physical environment, availability, distribution, movement, quality, and use of water in the upper Wisconsin River basin as an aid in planning and water management. The report presents general information on the basin derived from data obtained from Federal, State, and local agencies, New field data were collected in areas where information was lacking. More detailed studies of problem areas may be required in the future, as water needs and related development increase. The upper Wisconsin River basin is the headwaters of the Wisconsin River drainage and includes about 2,730 square miles in northern Wisconsin (upstream from the gage on the Wisconsin River at Merrill). An additional 50 square miles of the basin lies in Michigan and is not covered by this report. The report area includes parts of Forest, Langlade, Lincoln, Marathon, Oneida, Price, Taylor, and Vilas Counties, Many organizations and persons assisted the study by providing data. Among the contributors were the University of Wisconsin-Extension, Geological and Natural History Survey, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin, and the Wisconsin Valley Improvement Company, Municipal water officials furnished water-supply information and well records, Many individuals allowed access to their wells for water-level measurements and collection of water samples for chemical analysis.

Wisconsin↗

USGS1974

Water resources of Wisconsin--Lake Superior basin

Wisconsin↗

USGS2011

Analysis of the deconstruction of Dyke Marsh, George Washington Memorial Parkway, Virginia-Progression, geologic and manmade causes, and effective restoration scenarios

This report is a synthesis of the latest findings from an ongoing study of Dyke Marsh, an eroding freshwater tidal wetland that is scheduled for federal restoration. Its purpose is to provide an accurate and up-to-date temporal and geological framework for the marsh, of which most is new information (plus a compilation of historical and recent information), that is directly relevant to the restoration effort and also is relevant to short-term and long-term land management decisions regarding this natural resource. Analysis of field evidence, aerial photography, and published maps has revealed an accelerating rate of erosion and marsh loss at Dyke Marsh, which now appears to put at risk the short term survivability of this marsh. The destabilization of Dyke Marsh is outlined here, spanning an approximately 70-year time interval (1940-2010). This freshwater tidal marsh has shifted from a semi-stable net depositional environment (1864-1937) into a strongly erosional one, during a time when it currently is in early-phase planning for comprehensive restoration. The marsh has been deconstructed over the past 70 years by a combination of manmade and natural causes. The marsh initially experienced a strong destabilizing period between 1940 and 1972 by direct dredge mining of the marsh surface. By 1976 the marsh had entered a net destructive phase, where it remains at present. Photoanalysis of time-sequence aerial photographs of Dyke Marsh enabled us to calculate shoreline erosion estimates for this marsh over 19 years (1987-2006), as well as to quantify overall marsh acreage for 6 calendar years spanning an ~70 year interval (1937-2006). Photo overlay of a historic map enabled us to extend our whole-marsh acreage calculations back to 1883. Both sets of analyses were part of a geologic framework study in support of current efforts by the National Park Service (NPS) to restore this urban wetland. Two time intervals were selected for our shoreline erosion analyses, based on image quality and availability: 1987 to 2002, and 2002 to 2006. The more recent time interval shows a marked increase in erosion in the southern part of Dyke Marsh, following a wave-induced breach of a small peninsula that had protected its southern shoreline. Field observations and analyses of annual aerial imagery between 1987 and 2006 revealed a progressive increase in wave-induced erosion that presently is deconstructing Hog Island Gut, the last significant tidal creek network within the Dyke Marsh. These photo analyses documented an overall average westward shoreline loss of 6.0 to 7.8 linear feet per year along the Potomac River during this 19-year time interval. Additionally, photographic evidence documented that lateral erosion now is capturing existing higher order tributaries in the Hog Island Gut. Wave-driven stream piracy is fragmenting the remaining marsh habitat, and therefore its connectivity, relatively rapidly, causing the effective mouth of the Hog Island Gut tidal network to retreat headward visibly over the past several decades. Based on our estimates of total marsh area in the Dyke Marsh derived from 1987 aerial imagery, as much as 12 percent of the central part of the marsh has eroded in the 19 year period we studied (or ~7.5 percent of the original ~78.8 acres of 1987 marshland). Shoreline loss estimates for marsh parcels north and south of our study area have not yet been analyzed, although annual aerial photos from 1987 to 2002 confirm visible progressive shoreline loss in those areas over this same time interval.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2019

2017 Monitoring and tracking wet nitrogen deposition at Rocky Mountain National Park

The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE), the National Park Service (NPS), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued the Nitrogen Deposition Reduction Plan (NDRP) in 2007 to address the effects and trends of nitrogen deposition at Rocky Mountain National Park (RMNP). The agencies chose a glidepath approach to reduce wet nitrogen deposition to a level of 1.5 kilograms of nitrogen per hectare per year (kg N/ha/yr) by the year 2032 to protect sensitive ecosystems within RMNP from adverse effects. Another goal of the NDRP is to “reverse the trend of increasing nitrogen deposition at the park.” Trends in wet deposition data were analyzed at three sites in RMNP and three regional sites outside of the park. Wet nitrogen deposition (5-year rolling average) at Loch Vale in RMNP was 3.3 kg N/ha/yr, which is above the glidepath (2.4 kg N/ha/yr) in 2017. Wet nitrogen deposition has not decreased at RMNP or other sites in the region over the long-term. Ammonium concentrations showed a statistically significant increasing trend at all sites and nitrate concentrations showed a significant decreasing trend at four of the five sites over the period of record. In more recent years (2011-2017), wet nitrogen deposition showed no significant trend at monitoring sites in RMNP. Ammonium concentrations also showed no significant trend over the short-term, however nitrate concentrations did significantly decrease at two of the six sites.

Colorado↗

USGS2024

Dynamic modeling of coastal compound flooding hazards due to tides, extratropical storms, waves, and sea-level rise: A case study in the Salish Sea, Washington (USA)

The Puget Sound Coastal Storm Modeling System (PS-CoSMoS) is a tool designed to dynamically downscale future climate scenarios (i.e., projected changes in wind and pressure fields and temperature) to compute regional water levels, waves, and compound flooding over large geographic areas (100 s of kilometers) at high spatial resolutions (1 m) pertinent to coastal hazard assessments and planning. This research focuses on advancing robust and computationally efficient approaches to resolving the coastal compound flooding components for complex, estuary environments and their application to the Puget Sound region of Washington State (USA) and the greater Salish Sea. The modeling system provides coastal planners with projections of storm hazards and flood exposure for recurring flood events, spanning the annual to 1-percent annual chance of flooding, necessary to manage public safety and the prioritization and cost-efficient protection of critical infrastructure and valued ecosystems. The tool is applied and validated for Whatcom County, Washington, and includes a cross-shore profile model (XBeach) and overland flooding model (SFINCS) and is nested in a regional tide–surge model and wave model. Despite uncertainties in boundary conditions, hindcast simulations performed with the coupled model system accurately identified areas that were flooded during a recent storm in 2018. Flood hazards and risks are expected to increase exponentially as the sea level rises in the study area of 210 km of shoreline. With 1 m of sea-level rise, annual flood extents are projected to increase from 13 to 33 km 2 (5 and 13% of low-lying Whatcom County) and flood risk (defined in USD) is projected to increase fifteenfold (from 14 to USD 206 million). PS-CoSMoS, like its prior iteration in California (CoSMoS), provides valuable coastal hazard projections to help communities plan for the impacts of sea-level rise and storms.

Washington↗

USGS2017

Integration of vegetation community spatial data into a prescribed fire planning process at Shenandoah National Park, Virginia (USA)

Many eastern forest communities depend on fire for regeneration or are enhanced by fire as a restoration practice. However, the use of prescribed fire in the mesic forested environments and the densely populated regions of the eastern United States has been limited. The objective of our research was to develop a science-based approach to prioritizing the use of prescribed fire in appropriate forest types in the eastern United States based on a set of desired management outcomes. Through a process of expert elicitation and data analysis, we assessed and integrated recent vegetation community mapping results along with other available spatial data layers into a spatial prioritization tool for prescribed fire planning at Shenandoah National Park (Virginia, USA). The integration of vegetation spatial data allowed for development of per-pixel priority rankings and exclusion areas enabling precise targeting of fire management activities on the ground, as well as a park-wide ranking of fire planning compartments. We demonstrate the use and evaluation of this approach through implementation and monitoring of a prescribed burn and show that progress is being made toward desired conditions. Integration of spatial data into the fire planning process has served as a collaborative tool for the implementation of prescribed fire projects, which assures projects will be planned in the most appropriate areas to meet objectives that are supported by current science.

Virginia↗

USGS1993

Description of water-resource-related data compiled for Harvey County, south-central Kansas

Site, construction, geologic, water-level, water- quality, water-withdrawal, and well-survey data for sites in Harvey County were compiled in cooper- ation with the Harvey County Health Department as part of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment's Local Environmental Protection Program (LEPP). These data were entered into a relational data-base management system (RDBMS) to facilitate the analysis required to meet the LEPP goals of developing plans for nonpoint-source management and for public-water-supply protection. The data in the RDBMS are organized into digital data sets. The data sets contain the water- resource-related data compiled by the U.S. Geological Survey for 668 wells; by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment for 1,636 wells, 6 public-water-supply systems, 6 streams, and 2 surface-water impoundments; by the Kansas State Board of Agriculture for 423 wells and 26 streams or impoundments; by well-drilling con- tractors and the Kansas Geological Survey for 126 wells; and by Harvey County for 89 wells. In addition, data on 761 wells and 133 sites without wells resulting from a survey of rural landowners and residents by Harvey County as a part of the LEPP are contained in another data set. The data in these 7 data sets are available from the Harvey County Health Department in Newton, Kansas. (USGS)

Open-File Report↗

USGS2006

USGS Information Technology Strategic Plan: Fiscal Years 2007-2011

Introduction: The acquisition, management, communication, and long-term stewardship of natural science data, information, and knowledge are fundamental mission responsibilities of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). USGS scientists collect, maintain, and exchange raw scientific data and interpret and analyze it to produce a wide variety of science-based products. Managers throughout the Bureau access, summarize, and analyze administrative or business-related information to budget, plan, evaluate, and report on programs and projects. Information professionals manage the extensive and growing stores of irreplaceable scientific information and knowledge in numerous databases, archives, libraries, and other digital and nondigital holdings. Information is the primary currency of the USGS, and it flows to scientists, managers, partners, and a wide base of customers, including local, State, and Federal agencies, private sector organizations, and individual citizens. Supporting these information flows is an infrastructure of computer systems, telecommunications equipment, software applications, digital and nondigital data stores and archives, technical expertise, and information policies and procedures. This infrastructure has evolved over many years and consists of tools and technologies acquired or built to address the specific requirements of particular projects or programs. Developed independently, the elements of this infrastructure were typically not designed to facilitate the exchange of data and information across programs or disciplines, to allow for sharing of information resources or expertise, or to be combined into a Bureauwide and broader information infrastructure. The challenge to the Bureau is to wisely and effectively use its information resources to create a more Integrated Information Environment that can reduce costs, enhance the discovery and delivery of scientific products, and improve support for science. This Information Technology Strategic Plan for the USGS outlines key information technology (IT) strategic goals and objectives that will support the Bureau's science mission, while also aligning with the Department of the Interior (DOI) IT Strategic Plan and the DOI Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) Strategic Plan.

Circular↗

USGS2014

Conservation Action Planning: Lessons learned from the St. Marys River watershed biodiversity conservation planning process

Conservation Action Planning (CAP) is an adaptive management planning process refined by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and embraced worldwide as the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation. The CAP process facilitates open, multi-institutional collaboration on a common conservation agenda through organized actions and quantified results. While specifically designed for conservation efforts, the framework is adaptable and flexible to multiple scales and can be used for any collaborative planning effort. The CAP framework addresses inception; design and development of goals, measures, and strategies; and plan implementation and evaluation. The specific components of the CAP include defining the project scope and conservation targets; assessing the ecological viability; ascertaining threats and surrounding situation; identifying opportunities and designing strategies for action; and implementing actions and monitoring results. In 2007, TNC and a multidisciplinary graduate student team from the University of Michigan's School of Natural Resources and Environment initiated a CAP for the St. Marys River, the connecting channel between Lake Superior and Lake Huron, and its local watershed. The students not only gained experience in conservation planning, but also learned lessons that notably benefited the CAP process and were valuable for any successful collaborative effort—a dedicated core team improved product quality, accelerated the timeline, and provided necessary support for ongoing efforts; an academic approach in preparation for engagement in the planning process brought applicable scientific research to the forefront, enhanced workshop facilitation, and improved stakeholder participation; and early and continuous interactions with regional stakeholders improved cooperation and built a supportive network for collaboration.

Michigan, Ontario↗

USGS1953

Interpreting geologic maps for engineering purposes: Hollidaysburg quadrangle, Pennsylvania

This set of maps has been prepared to show the kinds of information, useful to engineers, that can be derived from ordinary geologic maps. A few additional bits of information, drawn from other sources, are mentioned below. Some of the uses of such maps are well known; they are indispensable tools in the modern search for oil or ore deposits; they are the first essential step in unraveling the story of the earth we live on. Less well known, perhaps, is the fact that topographic and geologic maps contain many of the basic data needed for planning any engineering construction job, big or little. Any structure built by man must fit into the topographic and geologic environment shown on such maps. Moreover, most if not all construction jobs must be based on knowledge of the soils and waters, which also are intimately related to this same environment. The topographic map shows the shape of the land the hills and valleys, the streams and swamps, the man-made features such as roads, railroads, and towns. The geologic map shows the kinds and shapes of the rock bodies that form the land surface and that lie beneath it. These are the facts around which the engineer must build.

Pennsylvania↗