USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Report Series”

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 1,513 records · Page 84Linked to original sources
USGS2013

USGS Arctic Ocean carbon cruise 2010: field activity H-03-10-AR to collect carbon data in the Arctic Ocean, August - September 2010

Carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) in the atmosphere is absorbed at the surface of the ocean by reacting with seawater to form carbonic acid, a weak, naturally occurring acid. As atmospheric carbon dioxide increases, the concentration of carbonic acid in seawater also increases, causing a decrease in ocean pH and carbonate mineral saturation states, a process known as ocean acidification. The oceans have absorbed approximately 525 billion tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, or about one-quarter to one-third of the anthropogenic carbon emissions released since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution (Sabine and others, 2004). Global surveys of ocean chemistry have revealed that seawater pH has decreased by about 0.1 units (from a pH of 8.2 to 8.1) since the 1700s due to absorption of carbon dioxide (Caldeira and Wickett, 2003; Orr and others, 2005; Raven and others, 2005). Modeling studies, based on Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) CO 2 emission scenarios, predict that atmospheric carbon dioxide levels could reach more than 500 parts per million (ppm) by the middle of this century and 800 ppm by the year 2100, causing an additional decrease in surface water pH of 0.3 pH units. Ocean acidification is a global threat and is already having profound and deleterious effects on the geology, biology, chemistry, and socioeconomic resources of coastal and marine habitats (Raven and others, 2005; Ruttiman, 2006). The polar and sub-polar seas have been identified as the bellwethers for global ocean acidification.

Data Series↗
USGS2013

Groundwater-quality data in the Santa Barbara study unit, 2011: Results from the California GAMA Program

Groundwater quality in the 48-square-mile Santa Barbara study unit was investigated by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) from January to February 2011, as part of the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program’s Priority Basin Project (PBP). The GAMA-PBP was developed in response to the California Groundwater Quality Monitoring Act of 2001 and is being conducted in collaboration with the SWRCB and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The Santa Barbara study unit was the thirty-fourth study unit to be sampled as part of the GAMA-PBP. The GAMA Santa Barbara study was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of untreated-groundwater quality in the primary aquifer system, and to facilitate statistically consistent comparisons of untreated-groundwater quality throughout California. The primary aquifer system is defined as those parts of the aquifers corresponding to the perforation intervals of wells listed in the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) database for the Santa Barbara study unit. Groundwater quality in the primary aquifer system may differ from the quality in the shallower or deeper water-bearing zones; shallow groundwater may be more vulnerable to surficial contamination. In the Santa Barbara study unit located in Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties, groundwater samples were collected from 24 wells. Eighteen of the wells were selected by using a spatially distributed, randomized grid-based method to provide statistical representation of the study unit (grid wells), and six wells were selected to aid in evaluation of water-quality issues (understanding wells). The groundwater samples were analyzed for organic constituents (volatile organic compounds [VOCs], pesticides and pesticide degradates, and pharmaceutical compounds); constituents of special interest (perchlorate and N-nitrosodimethylamine [NDMA]); naturally occurring inorganic constituents (trace elements, nutrients, major and minor ions, silica, total dissolved solids [TDS], alkalinity, and arsenic, chromium, and iron species); and radioactive constituents (radon-222 and gross alpha and gross beta radioactivity). Naturally occurring isotopes (stable isotopes of hydrogen and oxygen in water, stables isotopes of inorganic carbon and boron dissolved in water, isotope ratios of dissolved strontium, tritium activities, and carbon-14 abundances) and dissolved noble gases also were measured to help identify the sources and ages of the sampled groundwater. In total, 281 constituents and water-quality indicators were measured. Three types of quality-control samples (blanks, replicates, and matrix spikes) were collected at up to 12 percent of the wells in the Santa Barbara study unit, and the results for these samples were used to evaluate the quality of the data for the groundwater samples. Blanks rarely contained detectable concentrations of any constituent, suggesting that contamination from sample collection procedures was not a significant source of bias in the data for the groundwater samples. Replicate samples generally were within the limits of acceptable analytical reproducibility. Matrix-spike recoveries were within the acceptable range (70 to 130 percent) for approximately 82 percent of the compounds. This study did not attempt to evaluate the quality of water delivered to consumers; after withdrawal from the ground, untreated groundwater typically is treated, disinfected, and (or) blended with other waters to maintain water quality. Regulatory benchmarks apply to water that is served to the consumer, not to untreated groundwater. However, to provide some context for the results, concentrations of constituents measured in the untreated groundwater were compared with regulatory and non-regulatory health-based benchmarks established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and CDPH and to non-regulatory benchmarks established for aesthetic concerns by CDPH. Comparisons between data collected for this study and benchmarks for drinking water are for illustrative purposes only and are not indicative of compliance or non-compliance with those benchmarks. All organic constituents and most inorganic constituents that were detected in groundwater samples from the 18 grid wells in the Santa Barbara study unit were detected at concentrations less than drinking-water benchmarks. Of the 220 organic and special-interest constituents sampled for at the 18 grid wells, 13 were detected in groundwater samples; concentrations of all detected constituents were less than regulatory and non-regulatory health-based benchmarks. In total, VOCs were detected in 61 percent of the 18 grid wells sampled, pesticides and pesticide degradates were detected in 11 percent, and perchlorate was detected in 67 percent. Polar pesticides and their degradates, pharmaceutical compounds, and NDMA were not detected in any of the grid wells sampled in the Santa Barbara study unit. Eighteen grid wells were sampled for trace elements, major and minor ions, nutrients, and radioactive constituents; most detected concentrations were less than health-based benchmarks. Exceptions are one detection of boron greater than the CDPH notification level (NL-CA) of 1,000 micrograms per liter (μg/L) and one detection of fluoride greater than the CDPH maximum contaminant level (MCL-CA) of 2 milligrams per liter (mg/L). Results for constituents with non-regulatory benchmarks set for aesthetic concerns from the grid wells showed that iron concentrations greater than the CDPH secondary maximum contaminant level (SMCL-CA) of 300 μg/L were detected in three grid wells. Manganese concentrations greater than the SMCL-CA of 50 μg/L were detected in seven grid wells. Chloride was detected at a concentration greater than the SMCL-CA recommended benchmark of 250 mg/L in four grid wells. Sulfate concentrations greater than the SMCL-CA recommended benchmark of 250 mg/L were measured in eight grid wells, and the concentration in one of these wells was also greater than the SMCL-CA upper benchmark of 500 mg/L. TDS concentrations greater than the SMCL-CA recommended benchmark of 500 mg/L were measured in 17 grid wells, and concentrations in six of these wells were also greater than the SMCL-CA upper benchmark of 1,000 mg/L.

California↗
USGS2013

Classifications for Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration Act (CWPPRA) site-specific projects: 2010

The Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration Act (CWPPRA) funds over 100 wetland restoration projects across Louisiana. Integral to the success of CWPPRA is its long-term monitoring program, which enables State and Federal agencies to determine the effectiveness of each restoration effort. One component of this monitoring program is the classification of high-resolution, color-infrared aerial photography at the U.S. Geological Survey’s National Wetlands Research Center in Lafayette, Louisiana. Color-infrared aerial photography (9- by 9-inch) is obtained before project construction and several times after construction. Each frame is scanned on a photogrametric scanner that produces a high-resolution image in Tagged Image File Format (TIFF). By using image-processing software, these TIFF files are then orthorectified and mosaicked to produce a seamless image of a project area and its associated reference area (a control site near the project that has common environmental features, such as marsh type, soil types, and water salinities.) The project and reference areas are then classified according to pixel value into two distinct classes, land and water. After initial land and water ratios have been established by using photography obtained before and after project construction, subsequent comparisons can be made over time to determine land-water change.

Louisiana↗
USGS2013

Groundwater-quality data in the Bear Valley and Selected Hard Rock Areas study unit, 2010: Results from the California GAMA Program

Groundwater quality in the 112-square-mile Bear Valley and Selected Hard Rock Areas (BEAR) study unit was investigated by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) from April to August 2010, as part of the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program’s Priority Basin Project (PBP). The GAMA-PBP was developed in response to the California Groundwater Quality Monitoring Act of 2001 and is being conducted in collaboration with the SWRCB and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The BEAR study unit was the thirty-first study unit to be sampled as part of the GAMA-PBP. The GAMA Bear Valley and Selected Hard Rock Areas study was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of untreated-groundwater quality in the primary aquifer system and to facilitate statistically consistent comparisons of untreated groundwater quality throughout California. The primary aquifer system is defined as the zones corresponding to the perforation intervals of wells listed in the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) database for the BEAR study unit. Groundwater quality in the primary aquifer system may differ from the quality in the shallow or deep water-bearing zones; shallow groundwater may be more vulnerable to surficial contamination. In the BEAR study unit, groundwater samples were collected from two study areas (Bear Valley and Selected Hard Rock Areas) in San Bernardino County. Of the 38 sampling sites, 27 were selected by using a spatially distributed, randomized grid-based method to provide statistical representation of the primary aquifer system in the study unit (grid sites), and the remaining 11 sites were selected to aid in the understanding of the potential groundwater-quality issues associated with septic tank use and with ski areas in the study unit (understanding sites). The groundwater samples were analyzed for organic constituents (volatile organic compounds [VOCs], pesticides and pesticide degradates, pharmaceutical compounds, and wastewater indicator compounds [WICs]), constituents of special interest (perchlorate, N-nitrosodimethylamine [NDMA], and 1,2,3-trichloropropane [1,2,3-TCP]), and inorganic constituents (trace elements, nutrients, dissolved organic carbon [DOC], major and minor ions, silica, total dissolved solids [TDS], alkalinity, and arsenic and iron species), and uranium and other radioactive constituents (radon-222 and activities of tritium and carbon-14). Isotopic tracers (of hydrogen and oxygen in water, of nitrogen and oxygen in dissolved nitrate, of dissolved boron, isotopic ratios of strontium in water, and of carbon in dissolved inorganic carbon) and dissolved noble gases (argon, helium-4, krypton, neon, and xenon) were measured to help identify the sources and ages of sampled groundwater. In total, groundwater samples were analyzed for 289 unique constituents and 8 water-quality indicators in the BEAR study unit. Quality-control samples (blanks, replicate pairs, or matrix spikes) were collected at 13 percent of the sites in the BEAR study unit, and the results for these samples were used to evaluate the quality of the data from the groundwater samples. Blank samples rarely contained detectable concentrations of any constituent, indicating that contamination from sample collection or analysis was not a significant source of bias in the data for the groundwater samples. Replicate pair samples all were within acceptable limits of variability. Matrix-spike sample recoveries were within the acceptable range (70 to 130 percent) for approximately 84 percent of the compounds. This study did not evaluate the quality of water delivered to consumers. After withdrawal, groundwater typically is treated, disinfected, and (or) blended with other waters to maintain water quality. Regulatory benchmarks apply to water that is delivered to the consumer, not to untreated groundwater. However, to provide some context for the results, concentrations of constituents measured in the untreated groundwater were compared with regulatory and non-regulatory health-based benchmarks established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and CDPH, and to non-health-based benchmarks established for aesthetic concerns by CDPH. Comparisons between data collected for this study and benchmarks for drinking water are for illustrative purposes only and are not indicative of compliance or non-compliance with those benchmarks. All concentrations of organic and special-interest constituents from grid sites sampled in the BEAR study unit were less than health-based benchmarks. In total, VOCs were detected in 17 of the 27 grid sites sampled (approximately 63 percent), pesticides and pesticide degradates were detected in 4 grid sites (approximately 15 percent), and perchlorate was detected in 21 grid sites (approximately 78 percent). Inorganic constituents (trace elements, major and minor ions, nutrients, and uranium and other radioactive constituents) were sampled for at 27 grid sites; most concentrations were less than health-based benchmarks. Exceptions include one detection of arsenic greater than the USEPA maximum contaminant level (MCL-US) of 10 micrograms per liter (μg/L), three detections of uranium greater than the MCL-US of 30 μg/L, nine detections of radon-222 greater than the proposed MCL-US of 4,000 picocuries per liter (pCi/L), and one detection of fluoride greater than the CDPH maximum contaminant level (MCL-CA) of 2 milligrams per liter. Concentrations of inorganic constituents with non-health-based benchmarks (iron, manganese, chloride, and TDS) were less than the CDPH secondary maximum contaminant level (SMCL-CA) in most grid sites. Exceptions include two detections of iron greater than the SMCL-CA of 300 μg/L and one detection of manganese greater than the SMCL-CA of 50 μg/L.

California↗
USGS2013

USGS Arctic Ocean carbon cruise 2011: field activity H-01-11-AR to collect carbon data in the Arctic Ocean, August - September 2011

Carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) in the atmosphere is absorbed at the surface of the ocean by reacting with seawater to form a weak, naturally occurring acid called carbonic acid. As atmospheric carbon dioxide increases, the concentration of carbonic acid in seawater also increases, causing a decrease in ocean pH and carbonate mineral saturation states, a process known as ocean acidification. The oceans have absorbed approximately 525 billion tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, or about one-quarter to one-third of the anthropogenic carbon emissions released since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution (Sabine and others, 2004). Global surveys of ocean chemistry have revealed that seawater pH has decreased by about 0.1 units (from a pH of 8.2 to 8.1) since the 1700s due to absorption of carbon dioxide (Caldeira and Wickett, 2003; Orr and others, 2005; Raven and others, 2005). Modeling studies, based on Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) CO 2 emission scenarios, predict that atmospheric carbon dioxide levels could reach more than 500 parts per million (ppm) by the middle of this century and 800 ppm by the year 2100, causing an additional decrease in surface water pH of 0.3 pH units. Ocean acidification is a global threat and is already having profound and deleterious effects on the geology, biology, chemistry, and socioeconomic resources of coastal and marine habitats (Raven and others, 2005; Ruttiman, 2006). The polar and sub-polar seas have been identified as the bellwethers for global ocean acidification.

Data Series↗
USGS2013

Data entry module and manuals for the Land Treatment Digital Library

Across the country, public land managers make decisions each year that influence landscapes and ecosystems within their jurisdictions. Many of these decisions involve vegetation manipulations, which often are referred to as land treatments. These treatments include removal or alteration of plant biomass, seeding of burned areas, application of herbicides, and other activities. Data documenting these land treatments usually are stored at local management offices in various formats. Therefore, anyone interested in the types and effects of land treatments across multiple jurisdictions must first assemble the information, which can be difficult if data discovery and organization involve multiple local offices. A centralized system for storing and accessing the data helps inform land managers when making policy and management considerations and assists scientists in developing sampling designs and studies. The Land Treatment Digital Library (LTDL) was created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) as a comprehensive database incorporating tabular data, documentation, photographs, and spatial data about land treatments in a single system. It was developed over a period of several years and refined based on feedback from partner agencies and stakeholders. Currently, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land treatment data are being entered by USGS personnel as part of a memorandum of understanding between the USGS and BLM. The LTDL has a website maintained by the USGS Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center where LTDL data can be viewed https://www.usgs.gov/apps/ltdl . The resources and information provided in this data series allow other agencies, organizations, and individuals to download an empty, stand-alone LTDL database to individual or networked computers. Data entered in these databases may be submitted to the USGS for possible inclusion in the online LTDL. Multiple computer programs are used to accomplish the objective of the LTDL. The support of an information-technology specialist or professionals familiar with Microsoft Access™, ESRI’s ArcGIS™, Python, Adobe Acrobat Professional™, and computer settings is essential when installing and operating the LTDL. After the program is operational, a critical element for successful data entry is an understanding of the difference between database tables and forms, and how to edit data in both formats. Complete instructions accompany the program, and they should be followed carefully to ensure the setup and operation of the database goes smoothly.

Data Series↗
USGS2013

National wildlife refuge visitor survey 2012--Individual refuge results

The National Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System), established in 1903 and managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), is the leading network of protected lands and waters in the world dedicated to the conservation of fish, wildlife and their habitats. There are 560 national wildlife refuges and 38 wetland management districts nationwide, encompassing more than 150 million acres. The Refuge System attracts nearly 45 million visitors annually, including 34.8 million people who observe and photograph wildlife, 9.6 million who hunt and fish, and nearly 675,000 teachers and students who use refuges as outdoor classrooms. Understanding visitor perceptions of refuges and characterizing their experiences on refuges are critical elements of managing these lands and meeting the goals of the Refuge System. The Service collaborated with the U.S. Geological Survey to conduct a national survey of visitors regarding their experiences on national wildlife refuges. The purpose of the survey was to better understand visitor experiences and trip characteristics, to gauge visitors’ levels of satisfaction with existing recreational opportunities, and to garner feedback to inform the design of programs and facilities. The survey results will inform performance, planning, budget, and communications goals. Results will also inform Comprehensive Conservation Plans (CCPs), visitor services, and transportation planning processes. This Data Series consists of 25 separate data files. Each file describes the results of the survey for an individual refuge and contains the following information: • Introduction: An overview of the Refuge System and the goals of the national surveying effort. • Methods: The procedures for the national surveying effort, including selecting refuges, developing the survey instrument, contacting visitors, and guidance for interpreting the results.• Refuge Description: A brief description of the refuge location, acreage, purpose, recreational activities, and visitation statistics, including a map (where available) and refuge website link. • Sampling at This Refuge: The sampling periods, locations, and response rate for the refuge. • Selected Survey Results: Key findings for the refuge, including: o Visitor and trip characteristics o Visitor spending in the local communities o Visitors opinions about the refuge o Visitor opinions about National Wildlife Refuge System topics • Conclusion • References Cited • Survey Frequencies (Appendix A): The survey instrument with frequency results for the refuge. • Visitor Comments (Appendix B): The verbatim responses to the open-ended survey questions for the refuge.Individual-refuge results for the 53 participating refuges in the 2010-2011 national effort are available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/643/ as part of USGS Data Series 643. Combined results for the 53 participating refuges in the 2010-2011 national effort are available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/685/ as part of USGS Data Series 685.

Data Series↗
USGS2013

Quantitative determination of selenium and mercury, and an ICP-MS semi-quantitative scan of other elements in samples of eagle tissues collected from the Pacific Northwest--Summer 2011

Eagle tissues from dead eagle carcasses were collected by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service personnel at various locations in the Pacific Northwest as part of a study to document the occurrence of metal and metalloid contaminants. A group of 182 eagle tissue samples, consisting of liver, kidney, brain, talon, feather, femur, humerus, and stomach contents, were quantitatively analyzed for concentrations of selenium and mercury by atomic absorption techniques, and for other elements by semi-quantitative scan with an inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometer. For the various tissue matrices analyzed by an ICP-MS semiquantitative scan, some elemental concentrations (micrograms per gram dry weight) were quite variable within a particular matrix; notable observations were as follows: lead concentrations ranged from 0.2 to 31 in femurs, 0.1 to 29 in humeri, 0.1 to 54 in talons, less than (<) 0.05 to 120 in livers, <0.05 to 34 in kidneys, and 0.05 to 8 in brains; copper concentrations ranged from 5 to 9 in feathers, 8 to 47 in livers, 7 to 43 in kidneys, and 7 to 28 in brains; cadmium concentrations ranged from 0.1 to 10 in kidneys. In stomach contents, concentrations of vanadium ranged from 0.08 to 5, chromium 2 to 34, manganese 1 to 57, copper 2 to 69, arsenic <0.05 to 6, rubidium 1 to 13, and barium <0.5 to 18. Selenium concentrations from highest to lowest based on the matrix mean were as follows: kidney, liver, feather, brain, stomach content, talon, femur, and humerus. For mercury, the highest to lowest concentrations were feather, liver, talon, brain, stomach content, femur, and humerus.

Data Series↗
USGS2013

Archive of U.S. Geological Survey selected single-beam bathymetry datasets, 1969-2000

New national programs, as well as natural and man-made disasters, have raised awareness about the need to find new and improved ways to share information about the coastal and marine environment with a wide-ranging public audience. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Coastal and Marine Geology Program (CMGP) has begun a large-scale effort to incorporate the program's published, digital geophysical data into a single point of access known as the Coastal and Marine Geoscience Data System (CMGDS) (http://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/). To aid in data discovery, work is also being done to import CMGP data into highly visible data and information resources, such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) and two widely used Earth-science tools, GeoMapApp (GMA) (http://www.geomapapp.org) and Virtual Ocean (VO) (http://www.virtualocean.org/). This task of the CMGP Integrated Data Management System project will help support information exchange with partners, regional planning groups, and the public, as well as facilitate integrated spatial-data analysis. Sharing USGS-CMGP geophysical data via CMGDS, NGDC, GMA, and VO will aid data discovery and enable the data to support new purposes beyond those for which the data were originally intended. In order to make data available to NGDC, and from there into GMA and VO, the data must be reformatted into a standard exchange format and published. In 1977, a group of geophysical data managers from the public and private sectors developed the MGD77 format as the standard exchange format for geophysical data. In 2010, a tab-delimited version of the format was added as MGD77T (Hittelman and others, 1977). The MGD77T geophysical data format can include bathymetry, magnetics, gravity, and seismic navigation data. It is used for the transmission of data between marine institutions, data centers, and can be used by various software programs as an exchange format. A header (documentation) file and data file are created for each survey (Hittelman and others, 1977). More details about the MGD77T format are available at http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/dat/geodas/docs/mgd77.pdf (74MB PDF). This archive describes the detailed steps used to convert single-beam bathymetry and navigation files into the MGD77T format (Hittelman and others, 1977) for submission to NGDC and formal Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) (http://www.fgdc.gov/metadata) metadata as a publication of these single-beam bathymetry datasets.

Data Series↗
USGS2013

Digital database of the Holocene tephras of the Mono-Inyo Craters, California

This digital product comprises a collection of age and isopach data for the Holocene tephras of the Mono-Inyo Craters, California. Data on the most recent eruptions from this volcanic chain are relatively comprehensive, getting less so the further back in time. For the most recent eruptions to about 1,500 years ago, tephra beds within separate eruptive sequences have been studied and isopached. Before this, from about 2,000 years ago to about 5,000 years ago, there are insufficient data for isopaching. However, one isolated tephra of about 9,000 years ago was studied and isopached in detail. Regarding ages, there are many tens of radiocarbon ages that have been obtained on the Holocene Mono-Inyo volcanic products. The vast majority of these radiocarbon dates are associated with tephras at locales that can be considered distal (basically where the primary tephra is less than several centimeters (cm) thick). These dates represent carbon that was sequestered perhaps within several hundred years of the eruption but do not represent the ages of separate eruptive pulses. There are two reasons for this. In some cases, it is clear that the dated material is not associated with the eruption products. This is the case in some lake strata where carbon is either not physically close to a given tephra layer or where an age for a tephra layer was obtained by interpolation assuming a sedimentation rate. In other cases, it is not clear that a given tephra layer represents a primary tephra; in such cases the layer could instead be redeposited. At most distal localities (beyond about 5 kilometers (km) from the chain), there was no record made of whether tephra was primary or redeposited, and at these distances where tephra is thin, it is generally redeposited during later events such as fires or thunderstorms. These age data are not appropriate for use in dating the eruptive history of the volcanic chain, and are therefore not included in the present contribution. The carbon age data in the present contribution were obtained by careful consideration of the material being collected. In the best instances, carbon was collected from new growth on plants that were probably killed by an eruption event through burning and burial. Slightly poorer data were collected from burned and buried forest duff that is renewed frequently. Finally, some dates for older Holocene tephra layers at Black Lake, Nevada, downwind of the Mono-Inyo Craters, appear to allow correlation of the layers to proximal occurrences. In cases where these poorer data were collected but yielded ages statistically indistinguishable from better data, the poorer data were included in the analysis. In the most difficult cases, usually the furthest back in time, poorer data that were nevertheless statistically indistinguishable were weighted together to generate the age estimate. There are some known Holocene eruptions from the Mono-Inyo Craters that are not included in this tabulation, as so far a tephra has not been associated with the eruptions. A good example of this is the Java blocks. The Java block eruption, from a vent underlying the northwestern corner of Negit Island in Mono Lake, expelled numerous blocks that were rafted within the lake and that are mostly deposited on the southwestern and northern lakeshore. No tephra that can be correlated to this deposit has been found, and therefore the eruption is not included in this tabulation.

California↗
USGS2013

Alaska Geochemical Database, Version 2.0 (AGDB2)–Including “best value” data compilations for rock, sediment, soil, mineral, and concentrate sample mediaI

The Alaska Geochemical Database Version 2.0 (AGDB2) contains new geochemical data compilations in which each geologic material sample has one &ldquo;best value&rdquo; determination for each analyzed species, greatly improving speed and efficiency of use. Like the Alaska Geochemical Database (AGDB, http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/637/) before it, the AGDB2 was created and designed to compile and integrate geochemical data from Alaska in order to facilitate geologic mapping, petrologic studies, mineral resource assessments, definition of geochemical baseline values and statistics, environmental impact assessments, and studies in medical geology. This relational database, created from the Alaska Geochemical Database (AGDB) that was released in 2011, serves as a data archive in support of present and future Alaskan geologic and geochemical projects, and contains data tables in several different formats describing historical and new quantitative and qualitative geochemical analyses. The analytical results were determined by 85 laboratory and field analytical methods on 264,095 rock, sediment, soil, mineral and heavy-mineral concentrate samples. Most samples were collected by U.S. Geological Survey personnel and analyzed in U.S. Geological Survey laboratories or, under contracts, in commercial analytical laboratories. These data represent analyses of samples collected as part of various U.S. Geological Survey programs and projects from 1962 through 2009. In addition, mineralogical data from 18,138 nonmagnetic heavy-mineral concentrate samples are included in this database. The AGDB2 includes historical geochemical data originally archived in the U.S. Geological Survey Rock Analysis Storage System (RASS) database, used from the mid-1960s through the late 1980s and the U.S. Geological Survey PLUTO database used from the mid-1970s through the mid-1990s. All of these data are currently maintained in the National Geochemical Database (NGDB). Retrievals from the NGDB were used to generate most of the AGDB data set. These data were checked for accuracy regarding sample location, sample media type, and analytical methods used. This arduous process of reviewing, verifying and, where necessary, editing all U.S. Geological Survey geochemical data resulted in a significantly improved Alaska geochemical dataset. USGS data that were not previously in the NGDB because the data predate the earliest U.S. Geological Survey geochemical databases, or were once excluded for programmatic reasons, are included here in the AGDB2 and will be added to the NGDB. The AGDB2 data provided here are the most accurate and complete to date, and should be useful for a wide variety of geochemical studies. The AGDB2 data provided in the linked database may be updated or changed periodically.

Alaska↗
USGS2002

HAZPAC: An interactive map of Pacific Rim natural hazards, population, and infrastructure

This is an online version of a CD-ROM publication. The text files that describe using this publication make reference to software provided on the disc. For this online version the software can be downloaded for free from Adobe Systems and Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. (ESRI). Welcome to HAZPAC! HAZPAC is an interactive map about natural hazard risk in the Pacific Rim region. It is intended to communicate to a broad audience the ideas of 'Crowding the Rim,' which is an international, public-private partnership that fosters collaborative solutions for regional risks. HAZPAC, which stands for 'HAZards of the PACific,' uses Geographic Information System (GIS) technology to help people visualize the socioeconomic connections and shared hazard vulnerabilities among Pacific Rim countries, as well as to explore the general nature of risk. Please refer to the 'INTRODUCTION TO HAZPAC' section of the readme file below to determine which HAZPAC project will be right for you. Once you have decided which HAZPAC project is suitable for you, please refer to the 'GETTING STARTED' sections in the readme file for some basic information that will help you begin using HAZPAC. Also, we highly recommend that you follow the Tutorial exercises in the project-specific HAZPAC User Guides. The User Guides are PDF (Portable Document Format) files that must be read with Adobe Acrobat Reader (a free copy of Acrobat Reader is available using the link near the bottom of this page).

Data Series↗
USGS2013

Geophysical log database for the Floridan aquifer system and southeastern Coastal Plain aquifer system in Florida and parts of Georgia, Alabama, and South Carolina

A database of borehole geophysical logs and other types of data files were compiled as part of ongoing studies of water availability and assessment of brackish- and saline-water resources. The database contains 4,883 logs from 1,248 wells in Florida, Georgia, Alabama, South Carolina, and from a limited number of offshore wells of the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean. The logs can be accessed through a download directory organized by state and county for onshore wells and in a single directory for the offshore wells. A flat file database is provided that lists the wells, their coordinates, and the file listings.

Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina↗
USGS2013

Geophysical logging and geologic mapping data in the vicinity of the GMH Electronics Superfund site near Roxboro, North Carolina

Geologic mapping, the collection of borehole geophysical logs and images, and passive diffusion bag sampling were conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey North Carolina Water Science Center in the vicinity of the GMH Electronics Superfund site near Roxboro, North Carolina, during March through October 2011. The study purpose was to assist the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in the development of a conceptual groundwater model for the assessment of current contaminant distribution and future migration of contaminants. Data compilation efforts included geologic mapping of more than 250 features, including rock type and secondary joints, delineation of more than 1,300 subsurface features (primarily fracture orientations) in 15 open borehole wells, and the collection of passive diffusion-bag samples from 42 fracture zones at various depths in the 15 wells.

North Carolina↗
USGS2013

High-water marks from flooding in Lake Champlain from April through June 2011 and Tropical Storm Irene in August 2011 in Vermont

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Federal Emergency Management Agency, identified high-water marks after two floods in Vermont during 2011. Following a snowy winter, new monthly precipitation records were set in Burlington, Vermont, in April and May 2011, causing extensive flooding from April through June. The spring 2011 flooding resulted in a new record for stage (103.27 feet, referenced to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929) at the Lake Champlain at Burlington, Vt., gaging station (04294500). During August 28 and 29, 2011, tropical storm Irene delivered rainfall totals of 3 to more than 7 inches throughout Vermont, which resulted in extensive flooding and new streamflow records at nine streamgaging stations. Four presidential declarations of disaster were made following the 2011 flood events in Vermont. Thirty-nine high-water marks were identified and flagged to mark the highest levels of Lake Champlain from the May 2011 flooding, and 1,138 high-water marks were identified and flagged along Vermont rivers after flooding from tropical storm Irene in August 2011. Seventy-four percent of the high-water marks that were flagged were later found and surveyed to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988.

Vermont↗
USGS2013

Coastal topography–Northeast Atlantic coast, post-hurricane Sandy, 2012

This Data Series contains lidar-derived bare-earth (BE) topography, dune elevations, and mean-high-water shoreline position datasets for most sandy beaches for Fire Island, New York, and from Cape Henlopen, Delaware to Cape Lookout, North Carolina. The data were acquired post-Hurricane Sandy, which made landfall as an extratropical cyclone on October 29, 2012.

Delaware, Maryland, New York, North Carolina, Virg↗
USGS2014

EAARL-B coastal topography: eastern New Jersey, Hurricane Sandy, 2012: first surface

These remotely sensed, geographically referenced elevation measurements of lidar-derived first-surface (FS) topography datasets were produced by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center, St. Petersburg, Florida. This project provides highly detailed and accurate datasets for a portion of the New Jersey coastline beachface, acquired pre-Hurricane Sandy on October 26, and post-Hurricane Sandy on November 1 and November 5, 2012. The datasets are made available for use as a management tool to research scientists and natural-resource managers. An innovative airborne lidar system, known as the second-generation Experimental Advanced Airborne Research Lidar (EAARL-B), was used during data acquisition. The EAARL-B system is a raster-scanning, waveform-resolving, green-wavelength (532-nm) lidar designed to map nearshore bathymetry, topography, and vegetation structure simultaneously. The EAARL-B sensor suite includes the raster-scanning, water-penetrating full-waveform adaptive lidar, down-looking red-green-blue (RGB) and infrared (IR) digital cameras, two precision dual-frequency kinematic carrier-phase GPS receivers, and an integrated miniature digital inertial measurement unit, which provide for sub-meter georeferencing of each laser sample. The nominal EAARL-B platform is a twin-engine Cessna 310 aircraft, but the instrument may be deployed on a range of light aircraft. A single pilot, a lidar operator, and a data analyst constitute the crew for most survey operations. This sensor has the potential to make significant contributions in measuring sub-aerial and submarine coastal topography within cross-environmental surveys. Elevation measurements were collected over the survey area using the EAARL-B system. The resulting data were then processed using the Airborne Lidar Processing System (ALPS), a custom-built processing system developed in a NASA-USGS collaboration. ALPS supports the exploration and processing of lidar data in an interactive or batch mode. Modules for presurvey flight-line definition, flight-path plotting, lidar raster and waveform investigation, and digital camera image playback have been developed. Processing algorithms have been developed to extract the range to the first and last significant return within each waveform. ALPS is used routinely to create maps that represent submerged or sub-aerial topography. Specialized filtering algorithms have been implemented to determine the "bare earth" under vegetation from a point cloud of last return elevations. For more information about similar projects, please visit the Lidar for Science and Resource Management Web site.

New Jersey↗