USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Research Brief”

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 127 records · Page 7Linked to original sources
USGS1984

Habitat Suitability Index Models and Instream Flow Suitability Curves: Spotted bass

The Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) models presented in this publication aid in identifying habitat variable important to the growth and survival of spotted bass (Micropterus punctulatus). Facts, ideas, and concepts obtained from the research literature and expert reviews are synthesized and presented in a format that can be used for impact assessment. The models are hypotheses of species-habitat relationships, and model users should recognize that the degree of veracity of the HSI model, SI graphs, and assumptions will vary according to geographical area and the extent of the data base for individual variables. A brief discussion of selected Suitability Index (SI) curves as used in the Instream Flow Incremental Methodology (IFIM), and a discussion of SI curves available for the IFIM analysis of Spotted bass habitat are also included.

FWS/OBS↗
USGS1975

A brief history of the U.S. Geological Survey

Established by an Act of Congress in 1879 and charged with responsibility for "classification of the public lands, and examination of the geological structure, mineral resources, and products of the national domain," the U. S. Department of the Interior's Geological Survey has been the Nation's principal source of information about its physical resources the configuration and character of the land surface, the composition and structure of the underlying rocks, and the quality, extent, and distribution of water and mineral resources. Although primarily a research and fact-finding agency, it has responsibility also for the classification of Federal mineral lands and waterpower sites, and since 1926 it has been responsible for the supervision of oil and mining operations authorized under leases on Federal land. From the outset, the Survey has been concerned with critical land and resource problems. Often referred to as the Mother of Bureaus, many of its activities led to the formation of new organizations where a management or developmental function evolved. These included the Reclamation Service (1902), the Bureau of Mines (1910), the Federal Power Commission (1920), and the Grazing Service (1934, since combined with other functions as the Bureau of Land Management). Mrs. Rabbitt's summary of the Survey's history in the following pages brings out well the development of these diverse activities and the Survey's past contributions to national needs related to land and resources.

General Information Product↗
USGS2007

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Activities in the Exploration of Antarctica: Introduction to Antarctica (Including USGS Field Personnel: 1946-59)

INTRODUCTION Antarctica is the planet's fifth largest continent [13.2 million km2 (5.1 million mi2)]; it contains the Earth's largest (of two) remaining ice sheets; it is considered to be one of the most important scientific laboratories on Earth. This report is the introduction to a series that covers 60 years of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientific activity in Antarctica. It will concentrate primarily on three major topics: 1) a brief chronological record of the historical search, discovery, and exploration of the southern continent by humans; 2) early USGS scientific activities in Antarctica, listing expeditions, projects, people and resulting professional publications for Operation Highjump, 1946-47; Operation Windmill, 1947-48; USS Atka Reconnaissance Cruise, 1954-55; and Operation Deep Freeze I, II, III, and IV, 1955-59, including IGY; 3) significant changes that have occurred in Antarctic exploration and research since World War II will be discussed at the end of this report. Subsequent Open-File Reports will provide a year-by-year documentation of USGS scientific activities and accomplishments in Antarctica beginning with the post-IGY, 1959-60 research team. One Open-File Report is planned to be written for each field-based season. For an example of the series format, see Open-File Reports 2006-1113 (Meunier, 2007a) and 2006-1114 (Meunier, 2007b). This report is a companion document to Open-File Report 2006-1116 (Meunier, 2007c). The USGS mapping and science programs in Antarctica are among the longest continuously funded projects in the United States Antarctic Program (USAP). The 2005-06 field season is the 56th consecutive U.S. expedition in which USGS scientists have been participants, starting in 1946. USGS and the National Science Foundation (NSF) cooperation began with the establishment by NSF of the U.S. Antarctic (Research) Program [USA(R)P] in 1958-59 under Operation Deep Freeze IV (DF IV) and was given the responsibility for the principal coordination and management of all U.S. scientific activities in Antarctica in Deep Freeze 60 (DF 60) (1959-60). Financial support from NSF, mostly in the form of Memorandum of Understandings (MOUs) and Cooperative Agreements, extends back to this period and can be attributed to the need for accurate geologic, geophysical, and topographic base maps of specific field areas or regions where NSF-funded science projects were planned. The epoch of Antarctic exploration during the IGY was driven by science and, in a spirit of peaceful cooperation, the international scientific community wanted to limit military activities on the continent to logistical support (Meunier, 1979 [2007], p. 38). The USGS, a Federal civilian science agency in the Department of the Interior, has, since its founding in 1879, carried out numerous field-based national (and some international) programs in biology, geology, geophysics, hydrology, and mapping. Therefore, the USGS was the obvious choice for these tasks, because it already had a professional staff of experienced mapmakers, scientists, and program managers with the foresight, dedication, and understanding of the need for accurate maps to support the science programs in Antarctica when asked to do so by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences. Public Laws 85-743 and 87-626, signed in August 1958, and in September 1962, respectively, authorized the Secretary, U.S. Department of the Interior, through the USGS, to support mapping and scientific work in Antarctica (Meunier, 1979 [2007], appendix A). Open-File Report 2006-1116 includes scanned facsimiles of postal cachets. It has become an international practice to create postal cachets to commemorate special events and projects in Antarctica. A cachet is defined as a seal or commemorative design printed or stamped on an envelope to mark a philatelic or special event. The inked impression illustrates to the scientist, historian, stamp collector, and general public the multidisciplinary science projects staffed by USGS and collaborating scientists during the field season. Since 1960, philatelic cachets have been created by team members for each USGS field season and, in most cases, these cachets depict the specific geographic areas and field season program objectives. The cachets become a convenient documentation of the people, projects, and geographic places of interest for that year. Because the cachets are representative of USGS activities, each year's cachet is included as a digital facsimile in that year's Open-File Report. In the 1980s, multiple USGS cachets were prepared each year, one for use by the winter team at Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station and the other for the project work areas of the austral summer field season programs.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2018

Findings and lessons learned from the assessment of the Mexico-United States transboundary San Pedro and Santa Cruz aquifers: The utility of social science in applied hydrologic research

Study Region This study region encompasses the Transboundary San Pedro and Santa Cruz aquifers which are shared between the states of Sonora (Mexico) and Arizona (US). Special regional considerations include a semi-arid climate, basin-fill aquifers with predominantly montane recharge areas, economic drivers in the mining, trade, and military sectors, groundwater-dependent cities with expanding cones of depression, interbasin groundwater transfers, ground- and surface-water contamination, and protected aquatic and riparian habitats that act as significant migration corridors for hundreds of species, including some that are threatened and endangered. Study Focus We focus on lessons learned from the hydrologic assessment of the Transboundary San Pedro and Santa Cruz aquifers. We conducted the work, in two phases: (1) laying the groundwork and (2) implementation. The “laying the groundwork” phase consisted of binational meetings with stakeholders and key actors (agencies and individuals), and the development of an understanding of the physical, institutional, historical, and socio-political context. This led to signing of the binational Transboundary Aquifer Assessment Program (TAAP) agreement in 2009 and detailed the process for cooperation and coordination in the assessment of shared aquifers. The implementation phase began with an agreement to proceed with the study of four “focus” aquifers (Santa Cruz, San Pedro, Mesilla (Conejos-Médanos in Mexico), and Hueco Bolson (Bolsón del Hueco in Mexico)) and development of associated technical teams. Though we do include a brief discussion of the lessons learned from the physical science portion of the study, the results have been described and published elsewhere. The bulk of the paper instead focuses on the findings and lessons learned from the integration of social-science perspectives into a largely physical-science based program, since there is a growing recognition of the need for this type of approach especially in the management and assessment of transboundary aquifers. New Hydrological Insights for the Region The Sonora-Arizona effort succeeded because both countries were adequately represented, and because of flexibility of skills and ability of teams comprising both university and government scientists. Teams included social and earth scientists. Including the social sciences was critical to research design and implementation, and to addressing the cultural, institutional, and socio-political contexts of transboundary aquifer assessment. Significant components of the continuing implementation phase include strategic planning, data compilation and analysis, cross-border integration of datasets, geophysical and geochemical surveys, and internal, peer, and stakeholder engagement.

Arizona, Sonora↗
USGS2010

Restoration and revegetation associated with control of saltcedar and Russian olive: Chapter 7

Rationales for controlling or eliminating saltcedar and Russian olive from sites, river reaches, or entire streams include implicit or explicit assumptions that natural recovery or applied restoration of native plant communities will follow exotic plant removal (McDaniel and Taylor, 2003; Quimby and others, 2003). The vegetation that replaces saltcedar and Russian olive after treatment (“replacement vegetation”), with or without restoration actions, strongly influences the extent to which project objectives are successfully met. It is often assumed or implied that saltcedar and Russian olive removal alone is “restoration,” and many reports equate restoration success with areal extent of nonnative plants treated (for example, Duncan and others, 1993). However, removal of nonnative species alone does not generally constitute restoration. In this chapter, the term “restoration” refers to conversion of saltcedar- and Russian olive-dominated sites to a replacement vegetation type that achieves specific management goals and helps return parts of the system to a desired state. The degree to which a site is “restored” following removal of saltcedar or Russian olive typically depends upon a range of factors, such as (1) the site’s potential for restoration (such as extant soil conditions, site hydrology), (2) the direct and indirect effects of removal (for example, mechanical impacts to the site, effects of herbicides on nontarget vegetation), (3) the efficacy of restoration activities (for example, grading, reseeding, pole planting), and (4) the maintenance of processes that support native vegetation and prevent re-colonization by nonnative communities over the long term. This chapter summarizes and synthesizes the published literature on the topic of restoring native riparian vegetation following saltcedar and Russian olive control or removal. Most of the studies reviewed here are from saltcedar removal, revegetation, and river restoration projects in semiarid and arid parts of the Western United States. The paucity of literature on Russian olive prevents thorough evaluation of specific considerations for restoration following Russian olive removal; however, a few field studies are highlighted. Furthermore, the basic principles of restoration following vegetation removal and the considerations and lessons learned from saltcedar case studies are broadly applicable to sites across the Western United States. We begin with a brief discussion of planning and objective setting. Next, we discuss site factors and context, which are important to consider when selecting and prioritizing sites for restoration. We then review and synthesize the literature on restoration approaches and methods or combinations of methods to apply to particular sites. Throughout this chapter, we highlight what is known on the topics of restoring soils, vegetation, and site conditions following nonnative species removal, as well as future research needs.

Book chapter↗
USGS2012

Radiometric and paleomagnetic evidence for the Emperor reversed polarity event at 0.46 ± 0.05 M.Y. in basalt lava flows from the eastern Snake River Plain, Idaho

K-Ar and paleomagnetic data from cores through a sequence of basalt flows in the eastern Snake River Plain provide evidence for a brief (0.005 to 0.01 m.y.) reversal of the geomagnetic field 0.46 ± 0.05 m.y. ago. This reversed polarity event has also been found in sea-floor magnetic anomalies and in sediment cores and is probably the Emperor event of Ryan [1972].

Idaho, Oregon↗
USGS2000

A volcano in North Carolina? A closer look at a tall tale

The legacy of the 1811-1812 New Madrid, Central United States, earthquakes is one of tremendous enigma. We are left with just enough contemporary information to provide a measure of constraint on the isoseismal contours and therefore magnitudes of the three principal events ( Nuttli, 1973 ; Street, 1982 ; Johnston, 1996 ; Hough et al., 2000 ), yet given the sparse population density and limited documentation of effects, our interpretations will always be plagued by a significant degree of uncertainty. Although the magnitudes of the three principal New Madrid main shocks will likely never be established with precision, all contemporary analyses (see above references) obtain magnitudes upward of 7 for all three events—large enough to produce perceptible ground motions as far away as the Atlantic seaboard. One enduring and interesting bit of folklore concerning the New Madrid earthquakes of 1811-1812 involves the tale of a volcanic eruption in North Carolina at the time of the first main shock on 16 December 1811. The site of this supposed volcano was approximately 750 km east of the main shock and 40 km northwest of Asheville, North Carolina, at an area known in the early 1800's as “the springs” or “the warm springs” ( Figure 1 ). I will henceforth refer to the location by the name of the town that exists there now: Hot Springs. The tale has merited a brief mention in some modern treatises on the New Madrid sequence. For example, Penick ( 1981 ) mentions the 1812 letter by Asheville, North Carolina resident John Clarke Edwards that described the supposed eruption. Penick ( 1981 ) goes on to note that the letter was quickly discredited as a hoax.

North Carolina↗
USGS2000

Gap analysis: Concepts, methods, and recent results

Rapid progress is being made in the conceptual, technical, and organizational requirements for generating synoptic multi-scale views of the earth's surface and its biological content. Using the spatially comprehensive data that are now available, researchers, land managers, and land-use planners can, for the first time, quantitatively place landscape units - from general categories such as 'Forests' or 'Cold-Deciduous Shrubland Formation' to more categories such as 'Picea glauca-Abies balsamea-Populus spp. Forest Alliance' - in their large-area contexts. The National Gap Analysis Program (GAP) has developed the technical and organizational capabilities necessary for the regular production and analysis of such information. This paper provides a brief overview of concepts and methods as well as some recent results from the GAP projects. Clearly, new frameworks for biogeographic information and organizational cooperation are needed if we are to have any hope of documenting the full range of species occurrences and ecological processes in ways meaningful to their management. The GAP experience provides one model for achieving these new frameworks.

Landscape Ecology↗
USGS2013

Seafloor video footage and still-frame grabs from U.S. Geological Survey cruises in Hawaiian nearshore waters

Underwater video footage was collected in nearshore waters (<60-meter depth) off the Hawaiian Islands from 2002 to 2011 as part of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Coastal and Marine Geology Program's Pacific Coral Reef Project, to improve seafloor characterization and for the development and ground-truthing of benthic-habitat maps. This report includes nearly 53 hours of digital underwater video footage collected during four USGS cruises and more than 10,200 still images extracted from the videos, including still frames from every 10 seconds along transect lines, and still frames showing both an overview and a near-bottom view from fixed stations. Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) shapefiles of individual video and still-image locations, and Google Earth kml files with explanatory text and links to the video and still images, are included. This report documents the various camera systems and methods used to collect the videos, and the techniques and software used to convert the analog video tapes into digital data in order to process the images for optimum viewing and to extract the still images, along with a brief summary of each survey cruise.

Hawai'i↗
USGS2017

Map projections and the Internet

The field of map projections can be described as mathematical, static, and challenging. However, this description is evolving in concert with the development of the Internet. The Internet has enabled new outlets for software applications, learning, and interaction with and about map projections . This chapter examines specific ways in which the Internet has moved map projections from a relatively obscure paper-based setting to a more engaging and accessible online environment. After a brief overview of map projections, this chapter discusses four perspectives on how map projections have been integrated into the Internet. First, map projections and their role in web maps and mapping services is examined. Second, an overview of online atlases and the map projections chosen for their maps is presented. Third, new programming languages and code libraries that enable map projections to be included in mapping applications are reviewed. Fourth, the Internet has facilitated map projection education and research especially with the map reader’s comprehension and understanding of complex topics like map projection distortion is discussed.

Book chapter↗
USGS2023

Ecological effects of pinyon-juniper removal in the Western United States—A synthesis of scientific research, January 2014–March 2021

Executive Summary Increasing density of pinyon ( Pinus spp. ) and juniper ( Juniperus spp. ) woodlands (hereinafter “pinyon-juniper”), as well as expansion of these woodlands into adjacent shrublands and grasslands, has altered ecosystem function and wildlife habitat across large areas of the interior western United States. Although there are many natural and human-caused drivers of woodland infilling and expansion, restoration of sagebrush ( Artemisia spp. ) habitat through removal of pinyon-juniper is considered an urgent management objective in many locations, particularly in support of sagebrush-dependent wildlife species of conservation concern. In December 2020, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) established the Pinyon-Juniper Management Categorical Exclusion (PJCX) to expedite the regulatory process for pinyon-juniper removal projects on public lands, largely intended to benefit mule deer ( Odocoileus hemionus ) and greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ) habitats. During final preparation of this report, the BLM discontinued use of the PJCX (as of November, 2022), but the pinyon-juniper tree removal techniques assessed in this report are commonly used and understanding their effects remains relevant to land use planning. To address areas of uncertainty relative to potential ecological effects of the PJCX, we conducted a review of the peer-reviewed science literature to better understand the likely responses of vegetation, environmental (for example, soils), and wildlife variables to specific tree removal techniques permitted by the PJCX. In brief, the PJCX permitted removal of trees by either manual cutting, mechanical cutting, or mastication; allowed certain methods to redistribute or remove resulting tree biomass after treatment; and prohibited broadcast burning, roadbuilding, removal of old-growth, and seeding of non-native species. Specifically, we conducted our review to address the following questions: How will PJCX removal techniques affect plant communities, soils, and abiotic resources? How do these pinyon-juniper removal techniques affect wildlife communities, including both woodland- and sagebrush-dependent species? What are the potential ecological implications of different pinyon-juniper removal treatment types and implementation strategies (for example, treatment sizes) over time? What are the most important gaps in our scientific understanding of how treatments might affect targeted ecosystems over space and time (for example, potential effects of climate change)? To answer these questions, we considered studies related to pinyon-juniper ecosystems, focusing on research that occurred over a large portion of the interior western United States that is the primary focus of the PJCX. We also focused on papers published from 2014 onward, to avoid excessive overlap with other recent reviews on pinyon-juniper management effects. Using strict criteria, including only considering research that tested responses for statistical significance, we identified 48 papers that primarily examined treatment effects on vegetation and other environmental variables (1,709 responses), and 11 papers that addressed effects on wildlife (132 responses). Responses to the PJCX-permitted treatments were summarized as either positive (that is, a significant increase), negative (that is, a significant decrease), or non-significant (that is, no significant difference). Responses were assigned to categories (for example, Native Annual Grass/Forb Abundance) and hierarchical treatment levels. We found that there were large proportions of non-significant responses among all categories combined, with roughly half or more of all responses non-significant (48 percent for wildlife, 60 percent for vegetation-environmental), comparable to other recent systematic reviews of pinyon-juniper treatment effects. However, we also found that when there were significant responses, some important trends potentially emerged. Important undesirable outcomes included far more positive than negative responses of exotic grass and forb abundance among nearly all treatment types. Cutting treatments were also more likely to decrease biocrust cover and microbial activity. Potentially beneficial outcomes included mostly positive responses among sagebrush obligate species, including more positive than negative responses for mule deer and sage-grouse. Some treatment types (for example, mastication) also resulted in more positive than negative responses for native grasses and forbs (although, non-significant responses were the majority). We also highlighted many limitations of this review, including how responses often come from few studies, and how some response-treatment category combinations lack adequate response data. Moreover, the existing research is often insufficient to address many key questions about treatment effects, largely owing to short time-scales and limited spatial extents of observations, which do not match the size of treatments being implemented by land managers, nor capture long-term, post-treatment ecological dynamics. We also identify a lack of research that addresses key interactions that could undermine restoration objectives, including potential effects of climate change and grazing on post-treatment environments. Thus, we emphasize the importance of integrating these factors into future pinyon-juniper treatment research, and we stress the need for use of monitoring programs and research studies that partake in data collection and analysis over long durations and broad spatial scales.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2024

The petrology of dispersed organic matter in sedimentary rocks: Review and update

Organic petrology developed from coal petrology, and, in the 1960s, it began to be applied to the study of dispersed organic matter (DOM) in sedimentary rocks other than coal. Over the last few decades, the petrology of DOM has been used to characterize organic matter in sedimentary basins with an emphasis on fossil fuel resource exploration. Today, due to the global research shift on topics related to climate, organic petrology has expanded into new application areas, such as geothermal exploration, biological carbon storage (biochar), disposal, and management of radioactive waste. From the publication of the International Handbook of Coal Petrology (mid-20th century) to the present day, a large number of standards, books, and articles have been published as a result of the work of organic petrographers and petrologists around the world and efforts of the International Committee for Coal and Organic Petrology (ICCP) and The Society for Organic Petrology (TSOP) to promote the study of organic petrology. The current fundamentals and standards of organic petrology provide the international scientific community with well-informed guidance and recommendations to promote in-depth research. However, this information is currently widely scattered, leading to discrepancies in methodology and terminology. Therefore, this paper aims to present a comprehensive review of the main analytical standard test methods and techniques currently used in the petrology of DOM under reflected white light and UV and blue-light excitation, and to provide an efficient and well-defined reference guide. Furthermore, considering the important role of the ICCP in the development of organic petrology since the 1950s, a brief review of the ongoing activities of ICCP dealing with DOM is also presented.

International Journal of Coal Geology↗
USGS1981

Potential source for crushed granite aggregate in Heard County, Georgia

The production of crushed stone suitable for highway and general construction is a major industry in Georgia. The state ranks eighth in the nation in overall crushed stone production, and first in crushed granite production. Crushed stone production in Georgia in 1979 was 40,902,000 short tons worth $154,021,000 (D.H. White, Jr., US Bureau of Mines, personal commun., Aug. 1980). More than 3,000 people were employed by the crushed stone industry in Georgia during that year. Presently, the only active quarry in Heard County is located in an amphibolite. Amphibolite is not a conventional aggregate. It has a high specific gravity, a tendency to make elongate fragments, and varies considerably in abrasion tests. Because the nearest approved aggregate quarry is more than 25 miles from Franklin, the county seat, the purpose of this brief report is to describe a body of granite gneiss that may provide suitable aggregate for the crushed stone industry, potential quarry operators and various agencies in Heard County. This report is part of a project to study the geology and mineral resources of the Piedmont south of the Brevard Zone, and is not intended to supplant detailed site investigations by industry or consultants. The report is a joint effort between the Georgia Geologic Survey and the Office of Materials and Research of the Georgia Department of Transportation.

Georgia↗
USGS2020

Book review: Proceedings of the First International Snakehead Symposium

Snakehead fishes (family Channidae) are among the most maligned aquatic invasive species in the USA and some other countries where they have been introduced outside of their native range in Asia and Africa. Nevertheless, snakeheads continue to be widely exploited in the live‐food trade in aquaculture and wild‐capture fisheries, are highly sought by anglers, and are also popular in the aquarium trade (Courtenay and Williams 2004). The Northern Snakehead Channa argus is the most widespread of the three channid species that are currently naturalized in the USA. This species has generated much concern and controversy, a situation that is partly fueled by sensational media coverage and B‐grade science fiction horror films, such as “Frankenfish,” “Snakehead Terror,” and “Snakehead Swamp.” Media reports of snakehead introductions are often replete with provocative terms, such as “vicious,” “villain,” “voracious,” “monster,” “diabolical,” and even “ecological Armageddon.” When snakeheads first appeared in natural waters of the USA, fisheries professionals became increasingly interested in their status. Established populations rapidly expanded in the mid‐Atlantic region and Arkansas, with scattered reports of introduced snakeheads from isolated locations in Hawaii, California, North Carolina, Florida, the Upper Midwest, and New England. In 2002, snakeheads were added to the list of injurious fishes under the Lacey Act, thereby prohibiting their importation or transport across state lines without a permit. This symposium was conceived by the editors and other concerned fisheries professionals of the Mississippi River Basin Panel on Aquatic Invasive Species. The mission of the symposium, held in Alexandria, Virginia, in July 2018, was to bring together experts on snakehead biology and ecology and to synthesize existing information into summary papers. In this book, 35 authors contributed to 15 peer‐reviewed articles that detail the current state of knowledge about snakehead introductions in the USA. Additionally, 16 abstracts are included from meeting presentations that were not accompanied by full‐length manuscripts. Also included is a summary of a facilitated symposium panel discussion featuring eight experts representing state and federal natural resource agencies and private fishing organizations. The book is organized into six sections. In the first section (Distribution), three papers provide an overview of the Channa species introduced into the USA and historical accounts of occurrence and dispersal of the Northern Snakehead in the mid‐Atlantic region and Arkansas. The second section (Biology/Ecology) consists of two articles that examine growth and energetics of Northern Snakehead populations and two papers that investigate diet, diel feeding activity, and movement of this species in the Potomac River drainage. The third section (Monitoring/Response) includes a paper that models range expansion of the Northern Snakehead in the southeastern USA based on occurrence data and environmental conditions. Also included in this section is a paper summarizing an environmental DNA study to assess the status and range of the Bullseye Snakehead C. marulius in southern Florida. The fourth section (Management/Control) is comprised of four papers that address harvest, age and growth, and development of a stock–recruitment model to inform management decisions regarding control and mitigation for Northern Snakehead populations in the greater Chesapeake Bay area. The fifth section (Perspectives) includes a paper on the history of snakehead introductions in Japan and a thought‐provoking social commentary on the human dimensions of Northern Snakehead management. Abstracts in the final section provide brief summaries of a diversity of snakehead studies, including aspects of distribution, ecology, behavior, control and monitoring efforts, public outreach, and pathology. The summary of the panel discussion is an engaging dialogue about the challenges of snakehead management in the context of conflicts regarding snakeheads as injurious versus their value as game and food species. Most of this book is focused on the Northern Snakehead. Much has been done to document snakehead distributions and certain aspects of snakehead biology, such as diets, age, and growth. Less research has been devoted to understanding the ecological impacts of snakeheads to native aquatic communities and ecosystems. This book would have benefited from a chapter summarizing the current systematics and diversity of the Channidae to inform fisheries biologists about the morphological characteristics of the family, approximate numbers of genera and species, and taxonomic instability. Exemplifying the latter, recent molecular and morphological evidence indicates uncertainty regarding identification of the feral snakehead population in Florida (Adamson and Britz 2019). Those authors suggest that this population may have originated from western Thailand, a possibility that could have implications for understanding historical pathways of snakehead introductions into the USA. In comparison with many published AFS symposia, this volume is relatively narrow in scope and lacks cohesive integration. It will primarily be of interest to those fisheries professionals engaged in the study of snakeheads as well as other nonnative species for which there are contrasting social values regarding their management: whether to monitor and attempt control or eradication efforts or to maintain populations for harvest as game or food species. The book should serve to identify information gaps and guide future research.

Transactions of the American Fisheries Society↗
USGS2003

Interim Progress Report on the Application of an Independent Components Analysis-based Spectral Unmixing Algorithm to Beowulf Computers

This report describes work done to implement an independent-components-analysis (ICA) -based blind unmixing algorithm on the Eastern Region Geography (ERG) Beowulf computer cluster. It gives a brief description of blind spectral unmixing using ICA-based techniques and a preliminary example of unmixing results for Landsat-7 Thematic Mapper multispectral imagery using a recently reported1,2,3 unmixing algorithm. Also included are computer performance data. The final phase of this work, the actual implementation of the unmixing algorithm on the Beowulf cluster, was not completed this fiscal year and is addressed elsewhere. It is noted that study of this algorithm and its application to land-cover mapping will continue under another research project in the Land Remote Sensing theme into fiscal year 2004.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1987

Water-resources activities of the U.S. Geological Survey in South Dakota; fiscal years 1986-87

In South Dakota, the first collection of streamflow data by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) was in 1903. Despite its early beginning, it was not until October 16, 1944, that the Bismarck District, comprising the states of North Dakota and South Dakota , was created to assess the water resources of the two states. The next major increase in collection of surface water records occurred during the mid-1940 's as a result of the Pick-Sloan Plan for Missouri Basin development. Since 1944, about 98 water resources studies have been made in South Dakota. These range from reconnaissance-type studies of counties and Indian reservations to research on small basin runoff and toxic wastes, the quality of water in lakes, the use of remote sensing for defining aquifers, and studies using digital models to describe the groundwater regimen and surface water hydraulics such as those currently underway in the James River basin and the Big Sioux River basin. During the past 20 years, 140 formal reports describing the studies and results of investigations have been prepared to inform the public and the scientific community. The location of surface water stations and observation wells in bedrock are tabulated. Brief (1 page) descriptions of current water resources projects in South Dakota include information on the location, purpose, period of performance, cooperating agencies, project leader, and completed reports. (Lantz-PTT)

Open-File Report↗
USGS2012

Ecological impacts of non-native species

Non-native species are considered one of the greatest threats to freshwater biodiversity worldwide (Drake et al. 1989; Allen and Flecker 1993; Dudgeon et al. 2005). Some of the first hypotheses proposed to explain global patterns of amphibian declines included the effects of non-native species (Barinaga 1990; Blaustein and Wake 1990; Wake and Morowitz 1991). Evidence for the impact of non-native species on amphibians stems (1) from correlative research that relates the distribution or abundance of a species to that of a putative non-native species, and (2) from experimental tests of the effects of a non-native species on survival, growth, development or behaviour of a target species (Kats and Ferrer 2003). Over the past two decades, research on the effects of non-native species on amphibians has mostly focused on introduced aquatic predators, particularly fish. Recent research has shifted to more complex ecological relationships such as influences of sub-lethal stressors (e.g. contaminants) on the effects of non-native species (Linder et al. 2003; Sih et al. 2004), non-native species as vectors of disease (Daszak et al. 2004; Garner et al. 2006), hybridization between non-natives and native congeners (Riley et al. 2003; Storfer et al. 2004), and the alteration of food-webs by non-native species (Nystrom et al. 2001). Other research has examined the interaction of non-native species in terms of facilitation (i.e. one non-native enabling another to become established or spread) or the synergistic effects of multiple non-native species on native amphibians, the so-called invasional meltdown hypothesis (Simerloff and Von Holle 1999). Although there is evidence that some non-native species may interact (Ricciardi 2001), there has yet to be convincing evidence that such interactions have led to an accelerated increase in the number of non-native species and cumulative impacts are still uncertain (Simberloff 2006). Applied research on the control, eradication, and management of non-native species has only just begun but some promising results have already emerged (see below), giving hope to a very difficult conservation issue. This chapter provides an overview of the role of non-native species in amphibian declines and summarizes the current state of knowledge of non-native species that are known, or considered to be, a threat to amphibian species and populations. The biological and socio-economic issues of non-native species control are examined and brief case studies of successful eradication programmes are provided.

Book chapter↗
USGS2016

Deserts

The deserts of California (Lead photo, Fig. 1) occupy approximately 38% of California’s landscape (Table 1) and consist of three distinct deserts: the Great Basin Desert, Mojave Desert, and Colorado Desert, the latter of which is a subdivision of the Sonoran Desert (Brown and Lowe 1980). The wide range of climates and geology found within each of these deserts result in very different vegetative communities and ecosystem processes and therefore different ecosystem services. In deserts, extreme conditions such as very high and low temperatures and very low rainfall result in abiotic factors (climate, geology, geomorphology, and soils) controlling the composition and function of ecosystems, including plant and animal distributions. This is in contrast to wetter and milder temperatures found in other ecosystems, where biotic interactions are the dominant driving force. However, despite the harsh conditions in deserts, they are home to a surprisingly large number of plants and animals. Deserts are also places where organisms display a wide array of adaptations to the extremes they encounter, providing some of the best examples of Darwinian selection (MacMahon and Wagner 1985, Ward 2009). Humans have utilized these regions for thousands of years, despite the relatively low productivity and harsh climates of these landscapes. Unlike much of California, most of these desert lands have received little high-intensity use since European settlement, leaving large areas relatively undisturbed. Desert landscapes are being altered, however, by the introduction of fire following the recent invasion of Mediterranean annual grasses. As most native plants are not fire-adapted, they Many do not recover, whereas the non-native grasses flourish. Because desert lands are slow to recover from disturbances, energy exploration and development, recreational use, and urban development will alter these landscapes for many years to come. This chapter provides a brief description of where the different deserts of California are located and their dominant vegetative communities. The abiotic factors that define these deserts and how these factors control vegetation and thus animal distribution among and within the various deserts are examined next. Following this section, ecosystem processes and iconic species of these deserts are discussed, followed by a concluding section on the future of these landscapes. The latter section will be mostly focused on the Mojave Desert, as it is both the largest California desert and also where most of the research on California deserts has occurred.

California↗