USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Annual Report”

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 1,549 records · Page 86Linked to original sources

Hydrologic reconnaissance of the Tule Valley drainage basin, Juab and Millard Counties, Utah

The Tule Valley drainage basin is an area of about 940 square miles in Juab and Millard Counties in west-central Utah. Precipitation in the basin averages about 8 inches annually. There is no surface outflow and all streams are ephemeral. Annual runoff averages about 0.09 inch. Because there is no sustained runoff, and flow is local and infrequent, reservoirs do not provide dependable water supplies. Ground-water recharge from precipitation in the basin is estimated to average 7,600 acre-feet annually. Discharge, principally by evapotranspiration, averages about 40,000 acre-feet annually. Subsurface inflow from adjacent areas is estimated to average about 32,000 acre-feet annually.

Utah↗

Status assessment and conservation plan for the Grasshopper Sparrow ( Ammodramus savannarum )

The Grasshopper Sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum) breeds in grassland habitats throughout much of the U.S., southern and southeastern Canada, and northern Mexico. Additional subspecies are resident in Central America, northern South America, and the Caribbean. It winters primarily in the coastal states of the southeastern U.S., southern portions of the southwestern states, and in Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean. The species prefers relatively open grassland with intermediate grass height and density and patchy bare ground; because it is widely distributed across different grassland types in North America, it selects different vegetation structure and species composition depending on what is available. In the winter, they use a broader range of grassland habitats including open grasslands, as well as weedy fields and grasslands with woody vegetation. Analyses show significant range-wide population declines from the late 1960s through the present, primarily caused by habitat loss, degradation, and fragmentation. Grasshopper Sparrow is still a relatively common and broadly distributed species, but because of significant population declines and stakeholder concerns, the species is considered of conservation concern nationally and at the state level for numerous states. Many factors, often related to different grassland management practices (e.g., grazing, burning, mowing, management of shrub encroachment, etc.) throughout the species’ range, have impacts on Grasshopper Sparrow distribution, abundance, and reproduction and may represent limiting factors or threats given steep declines in this species’ population. Because of the concerns for this species, Grasshopper Sparrow has been identified as a focal species by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and this Status Assessment and Conservation Plan for Grasshopper Sparrow has been developed. Through literature searches and input from stakeholders across its range, this plan presents information about Grasshopper Sparrow population status, distribution, habitat needs, threats and limiting factors; synthesis of these resources has identified recommended action items addressing population status and trends, habitat conservation, management, research, inventory and monitoring, and education and outreach components that will facilitate Grasshopper Sparrow conservation across its full annual cycle.

Report↗

Data from theodolite measurements of creep rates on San Francisco Bay region faults, California

Introduction Our purpose is to annually update our creep-data archive on San Francisco Bay region active faults for use by the scientific research community. Earlier data (1979-2001) were reported in Galehouse (2002) and were analyzed and described in detail in a summary report (Galehouse and Lienkaemper, 2003). A complete analysis of our earlier results obtained on the Hayward Fault was presented in Lienkaemper, Galehouse and Simpson (2001) and updated in Lienkaemper and others (2012). Lienkaemper and others (2014) provide a new overview and analysis of fault creep along all sections of the northern San Andreas Fault system, from which they estimate by how much fault creep reduces the seismic hazard for each fault section. From 1979 until his retirement from the project in 2001, Jon Galehouse of San Francisco State University (SFSU) and many student research assistants measured creep (aseismic slip) rates on these faults. The creep measurement project, which was initiated by Galehouse, continued through the Geosciences Department at SFSU from 2001-2006 under the direction of Karen Grove and John Caskey (Grove and Caskey, 2005) and since 2006 under Caskey (2007). Forrest McFarland has managed most of the technical and logistical project operations, as well as data processing and compilation since 2001. Data from 2001-2007 are found in McFarland and others (2007). From 2009 onward, we have released the raw data annually using this report (OF2009-1119) as a permanent publication link, while publishing more detailed analyses of these data in the scientific literature, such as Lienkaemper and others (2014). We maintain a project Web site (http://funnel.sfsu.edu/creep/) that includes the following information: project description, project personnel, creep characteristics and measurement, map of creep-measurement sites, creep-measurement site information, and links to data plots for each measurement site. Our most current, annually updated results are, therefore, accessible to the scientific community and to the general public. Information about the project can currently be requested by the public by an email link ( fltcreep@sfsu.edu) found on our project Web site.

California↗

Floods of March-April 1960 in Eastern Nebraska and adjacent states

Snowmelt floods, record breaking on many streams and outstanding in terms of total area affected and runoff volumes generated, occurred in late March and early April 1960 on Missouri River tributaries in adjacent parts of six states. In order of area affected, the States are Nebraska, South Dakota, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, and Missouri. Five lives were lost, and the estimated damage was $14 million. Main-stem reservoirs kept Missouri River stages substantially below potential unregulated levels. Without regulation by reservoirs, the stage at Sioux City and Omaha would have been about 9 feet higher than it was and the damage would have been many millions of dollars more than actually occurred. The floods were caused by rapid melting of an extensive snow cover of unusual depth and water equivalent, augmented by light to moderate rains. Temperatures almost continuously below normal, beginning in late December and culminating in record lows at many places during the first half of March, resulted in the retention of record snow accumulations, much later and much farther south than normal. The snowfall in eastern Nebraska from December 27 to March 26 was about twice the annual average. The excessive snowfall and below-normal temperatures produced a record-breaking 75-day period of continuous snow cover at Omaha. A rapidly rising, eastward-moving temperature pattern late in March, in combination with an easterly orientation of many Nebraska streams, tended to magnify flood peaks. The rapid temperature rise started about March 18 in western Nebraska but not until March 26 in the eastern part of the State. As a consequence, flood discharges from the headwaters, often bearing heavy ice floes, arrived in the lower reaches simultaneously with or even ahead of the breakup of the unusually heavy ice cover and caused serious jamming. Comparisons of the peak discharges of the 1960 snowmelt floods with those of previous floods reveal several interesting facts. Peak discharges on the Missouri main stem were appreciably less than those in several other years, largely because of effective reservoir control of upstream runoff, but, many tributaries throughout the report area had maximum discharges for their periods of record. Particularly significant are comparisons at some stations for which historical flood data were available. For example, the peak discharge of the Platte River at Louisville, Nebr., was the greatest since at least 1881, and the peak on the Elkhorn River at Waterloo, Nebr., was the greatest snowmelt flood since at least 1912, although it was less than half of the rain peak of June 12, 1944. Following a characteristic pattern for snowmelt floods, the peaks on the smaller streams generally were not unusual, but the cumulative effect of widespread high runoff throughout the stream systems caused higher and more outstanding peaks in the larger basins. Peaks due to local rains of high intensity often are more significant for small areas. Snowmelt floods occur less frequently than rainfall floods in most basins of this flood area.. Studies made for this report show that an average of only about one out of every four maximum annual flood discharges in the report area results primarily from snowmelt. But for streams flowing from north to south in South Dakota and Iowa, the ratio of snowmelt peaks to rainfall peaks is higher. Comparisons of 1960 flood volumes with those for previous floods are even more striking than peak-discharge comparisons. Flood volumes at eight selected stations for the maximum 20-day period during March and April 1960 exceeded all previous 20-day volumes with only one exception; the ratios ranged from 3.11 for Vermillion River near Wakonda, S. Dak., to 0.93 for Elkhorn River at Waterloo, Nebr. The ratio of the 20-day volume to the 1960 annual runoff for the same group of stations ranged from 20 percent at Niobrara River near Spencer, Nebr., to 74 percent on the Vermillion River. For the lat

Water Supply Paper↗

Drought and deluge: Effects of recent climate variability on groundwater levels in eastern Arkansas

Arkansas experienced wide extremes in climate variability during the period of 2005 to 2010, recording the largest annual precipitation ever recorded in the State (100.05 inches) in 2009. Many weather stations across the State reported between 80 to 90 inches of rainfall in 2009. For comparison, the average annual precipitation in Little Rock, Arkansas, for the period 1878 to 2010 was 47.1 inches. In contrast, 2005 and 2010 were the 7th and 14th driest years on record in Little Rock with 34.55 and 36.52 inches, respectively; both tied as the hottest years ever recorded in Arkansas. The wettest year on record in Little Rock (2009) was interspersed within these dry years, with a total of 81.79 inches. Fifteen weather stations within the State ranked 2009 as the wettest year on record. Extremes in annual precipitation rates may lead to greater variability in groundwater recharge rates and water use, particularly in the agricultural areas in eastern Arkansas that rely heavily on groundwater produced from the Mississippi River Valley alluvial aquifer (hereafter referred to as the alluvial aquifer). How does this variability affect the groundwater system and water use therein? Are the effects of this variability discernable in measured water levels in wells? Czarnecki and Schrader examined these questions and provided some insights, the results of which are presented here.

Arkansas↗

Estimates of county-level nitrogen and phosphorus from fertilizer and manure from 1950 through 2017 in the conterminous United States

This report and associated dataset provide tabular county-level estimates of kilograms of nitrogen and phosphorus generated from two sources: (a) fertilizer from commercial sources and (b) livestock-based manure, for the period 1950 through 2017 for the conterminous United States. Datasets collected during this time span are for intervals of approximately 5 years that coincide with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s census years. Nutrients from fertilizer for 1950–2012 are exactly those previously described in U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) reports and datasets; however, estimates of nutrient masses from fertilizer applied in 2017 are described here as a new product modeled from 11 predictor variables for 2017 including county-level fertilizer expenditures, land use, and acres of fertilized land. Fertilizer-based estimates are provided for both farm and nonfarm (urban) usage. The estimates of nutrients from manure for all years were generated anew by using methods and formulas described in previous USGS reports but adjusted to account for historical changes in the annual averages of animal weights. The tabular data are available as an accompanying data release.

Conterminous United States↗

Summary of annual records of chemical quality of water of the Arkansas River in Oklahoma and Arkansas; 1945-52, a progress report

The Arkansas River is subject to many types of pollution downstream from the Oklahoma-Kansas State line, and its inferior quality together with its erratic flow pattern has caused it to be largely abandoned as a source of municipal and industrial water supply. Currently, the Arkansas River is not directly used as a source of public supply in any part of the basin in either Oklahoma or Arkansas. In general, the chemical concentration of the river water increases downstream from the Oklahoma-Kansas State line to Tulsa because of tributary inflow from the Salt Fork Arkansas River and the Cimarron River, both streams being sources of large amounts of natural salts and industrial wastes. A decrease in concentration of dissolved solids is noted downstream from Tulsa due to tributary inflow from the Verdigris, Neosho, and Illinois Rivers; another increase in concentration occurs with tributary inflow from the Canadian River, which is largely oilfield wastes. A progressive decrease in concentration is noted as the river flows through Arkansas to the Mississippi River, because all major tributaries below the Canadian River have a dilution effect upon the chemical concentration of the Arkansas River water. Proposals for storage and regulating reservoirs on the Arkansas River in both Oklahoma and Arkansas have been made by the Corps of Engineers and others. Additional proposals are being considered in the present Arkansas-White-Red River Basin Inter-Agency Sub-Committee studies. If constructed, these reservoirs will provide an opportunity for control of flow and beneficial use of Arkansas River water both at and downstream from these sites. Impoundment alone will greatly reduce the extremes in water quality, and by reasonable control of municipal and industrial wastes, the water at some points on the river would be comparable in quality to many existing municipal and industrial supplies in the basin.

Circular↗

Summary of hydrologic data collected during 1974 in Dade County, Florida

This report is ninth in a series documenting the annual hydrologic conditions in Dade County, Florida. The hydrologic conditions in Dade County for the 1974 water year (October 1, 1973 to September 30, 1974) except for rainfall are summarized in tables, graphs, and maps. The locations of ground-water data-collection stations are shown in figure 1, rainfall and surface-water stations in figure 2, and water quality sampling stations in figure 43. As shown, the network of stations is extensive. The long-term records (1940 to 1974) furnish background information vital in the analysis of effects of water-management practices.

Florida↗

Water resources data, Arizona, water year 1997

Water discharge data for the 1997 water year for Arizona consist of records of stage, discharge, and water quality of streams; stage, contents, water quality of lakes and reservoirs; water levels of observation wells; and quality of ground water. This report contains discharge records for 192 gaging stations, annual peaks for 19 crest-stage partialrecord stations; contents only records for 8 lakes and reservoirs; stage and (or) contents for l lake; elevation only for I streamtlow station; included with gaging-station records, consisting of monthend or monthly stage, contents, and evaporation oflakes and reservoirs, diversions, and return flows; water-quality records for 27 continuous-record stations; water-quality data for water from 286 wells. The data represent that part ofthe National Water Data System operated by the U.S. Geological Survey cooperating Federal and State agencies in Arizona.

Arizona↗

Water resources data, Arizona, water year 1998

Water discharge data for the 1998 water year for Arizona consist of records of stage, discharge, and water quality of streams; stage, contents, water quality of lakes and reservoirs; water levels of observation wells; and quality of ground water. This report contains discharge records for 167 gaging stations, annual peaks for 27 crest-stage partial-record stations; contents only records for 8 lakes and reservoirs; stage and (or) contents for 1 lake; elevation only for 1 streamflow station; included with gaging-station records, consisting of monthend or monthly stage, contents, and evaporation of lakes and reservoirs, diversions, and return flows; water-quality records for 14 continuous-record stations; water-quality data for water from 188 wells. The data represent that part of the National Water Data System operated by the U.S. Geological Survey cooperating Federal and State agencies in Arizona.

Arizona↗

Water resources data, Arizona, water year 1995

Water discharge data for the 1995 water year for Arizona consist of records of stage, discharge, and water quality of streams; stage, contents, water quality of lakes and reservoirs; water levels of observation wells; and quality of ground water. This report contains discharge records for 182 gaging stations, annual peaks for 22 crest-stage partialrecord stations; contents only records for 8 lakes and reservoirs; stage and contents for 1 lake; elevation only for 1 streamflow station; 20 supplementary records, included with gaging-station records, consisting of monthend or monthly stage, contents, and evaporation of lakes and reservoirs, diversions, and return flows; water-quality records for 20 continuous-record stations; water-quality data for water from 202 wells. The data represent that part of the National Water Data System operated by the U.S. Geological Survey cooperating Federal and State agencies in Arizona.

Arizona↗

Water resources data, Arizona, water year 1986

Water discharge data for the 1986 water year for Arizona consist of records of stage, discharge, and water quality of streams; stage, contents, and water quality of lakes and reservoirs; water levels of observation wells; and quality of ground water. This report contains discharge records for 171 gaging stations, annual peaks for 21 crest-stage partial-record stations, and discharge measurements at 11 miscellaneous sites; contents only records for 9 lakes and reservoirs; stage and contents for 1 lake; elevation only for 1 streamflow station; 22 supplementary records, included with gaging-station records, consisting of monthend or monthly stage, contents, and evaporation of lakes and reservoirs, diversions, and return flows; water-quality records for 33 continuous-record stations and 8 miscellaneous sites; water levels for 88 observation wells; and water-quality data for water from 345 wells. The data represent that part of the National Water Data System operated by the U.S. Geological Survey and cooperating Federal and State Agencies in Arizona.

Arizona↗

Ground-water levels and quality data for Georgia, 1977

This report begins a publication format that will present annually both water-level and water-quality data. In this format the information is presented in two-page units: the left page includes text which summarizes the information for an area or subject and the right page consists of one or more illustrations. Daily mean water-level fluctuations and trends are shown in hydrographs for the previous year and fluctuations for the monthly mean water level the previous 10 years for selected observation wells in Georgia. The selected wells best illustrate the effects of changes in recharge and discharge in the various ground-water reservoirs in the State. A short narrative explains fluctuations and trends in each hydrograph.

Georgia↗

Water resources data for Arizona, water year 1987

Water discharge data for the 1987 water year for Arizona consist of records of stage, discharge, and water quality of streams; stage, contents, and water quality of lakes and reservoirs; water levels of observation wells; and quality of ground water. This report contains discharge records for 168 gaging stations, annual peaks for 22 crest-stage partial-record stations, and discharge measurements at 8 miscellaneous sites; contents only records for 9 lakes and reservoirs; stage and contents for 1 lake; elevation only for 1 streamflow station; 20 supplementary records, included with gaging-station records, consisting of monthend or monthly stage, contents, and evaporation of lakes and reservoirs, diversions, and return flows; water-quality records for 41 continous-record stations and 6 miscellaneous sites; water levels for 1,007 observation wells; and water-quality data for water from 261 wells. The data represent that part of the National Water Data System operated by the U.S. Geological Survey and cooperating Federal and State Agencies in Arizona.

Arizona↗

Water resources data, Arizona, water year 1985

Water resources data for the 1985 water year for Arizona consist of records of stage, discharge, and water quality of streams; stage, contents, and water quality of lakes and reservoirs; water levels of observation wells; and quality of ground water. This report contains discharge records for 186 gaging stations, annual peaks for 24 crest-stage partial-record stations, and discharge measurements at 7 miscellaneous sites; contents only records for 8 lakes and reservoirs; stage and contents for 1 lake; elevation only for 1 streamflow station; 18 supplementary records, included with gaging-station records, consisting of monthend or monthly stage, contents, and evaporation of lakes and reservoirs, diversions, and return flows; water-quality records for 34 continuous-record stations and 5 miscellaneous sites; water levels for 95 observation wells; and water-quality data for water from 230 wells. The data re-present that part of the National Water Data System operated by the U.S. Geological Survey and cooperating Federal and State Agencies in Arizona.

Arizona↗

Annual water-resources review, White Sands Missile Range: 1971

This report presents water-resource information that was collected at White Sands Missile Range during 1971 and early 1972 by personnel of the U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division. Data on ground-water pumpage and resulting water-level fluctuation, chemical quality, percipitation, and surface-water runoff are summarized in the report. The data were obtained as a result of the continuing water-resources basic-data collection program sponsored by the Facilities Engineering Directorate, White Sands Missile Range.

New Mexico↗

Analysis of trends in terrestrial vegetation at Mediterranean Coast Network Parks: Channel Islands National Park

The five islands comprising Channel Islands National Park (CHIS) experience natural gradients in temperature and moisture driven by ocean currents. Additionally, the islands were used as ranchlands and military land before becoming a national park, resulting in widespread erosion and vegetation change. As a result, CHIS spans gradients in climate as well as ranching duration and time since animal removal. Vegetation monitoring was initiated in 1984 on three islands (Anacapa, Santa Barbara, San Miguel), in 1990 on Santa Rosa Island, and in 1998 on Santa Cruz Island, with the goal of documenting the long-term response of island vegetation to ranch animal removal and climate fluctuations. Since that time, monitoring has documented the range of natural fluctuation in island environments over decades and provided insights into vegetation change in ecosystems unencumbered by ongoing development. Long-term vegetation monitoring at CHIS is therefore a rare example of an ecosystem experiment that demonstrates the results of management actions and serves as a baseline for land managers and scientists worldwide. Terrestrial vegetation data collected between 1984 and 2018 were modeled to estimate trends over time and to characterize relationships with covariates related to site characteristics, nonnative mammal removal programs, and water balance metrics. Data were analyzed for trends in vegetation cover, woody plant density, and plant community diversity grouped by life form and nativity across all islands and within individual islands, as well as for several individual species that dominate plant communities or present challenges to native plant recovery. In all, a total of 162 trend and covariate models were tested in this study, the details of which are provided in this report. Briefly, results reflect a decline in nonnative annual disturbance-thriving species with the reduction in animal grazing and trampling. Increasing trends were observed in native shrub density and native shrub recruitment density, as well as native shrub cover across all islands averaged together and on Santa Cruz Island. However, opposite trends were seen on the smaller islands of Santa Barbara and Anacapa, where increasing seabird activity may be damaging vegetation. Further results indicate the importance of soil moisture, relative humidity, fog, precipitation, site exposure, and solar radiation for vegetation patterns and trends. In many instances, there are apparent interacting effects of environmental variables with trends related to nonnative mammal removal and site location. Vegetation patterns in space and time emerge in the dataset as nuanced responses to interacting drivers.

Calfornia↗

Water resources data for Arizona, water year 1978

Water resources data for the 1978 water year for Arizona consist of records of stage, discharge, and water quality of streams; stage, contents, and water quality of lakes and reservoirs; water levels of observation wells; and quality of ground water. This report contains discharge records for 241 gaging stations, annual peaks for 77 crest-stage partial-record stations, and discharge measurements at 58 miscellaneous sites; contents only records for 9 lakes and reservoirs; stage and contents for 1 lake; elevations only for 2 lakes or reservoirs; gage height only for 1 lake and 1 head over a dam; 16 supplementary records, included with gaging-station records, consisting of month end or monthly stage, contents, and evaporation of lakes and reservoirs, diversions, and return flows; 2 low-flow investigations; water-quality records for 87 continuous record stations and 16 miscellaneous sites; water levels for 101 observation wells; and water-quality data for water from 189 wells. The data represent that part of the National Water Data System operated by the U.S. Geological Survey and cooperating Federal and State Agencies in Arizona.

Arizona↗