USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “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 163 records · Page 9Linked to original sources
USGS2002

Estimating total human-caused mortality from reported mortality using data from radio-instrumented grizzly bears

Tracking mortality of the Yellowstone grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos horribilis ) is an essential issue of the recovery process. Problem bears removed by agencies are well documented. Deaths of radiocollared bears are known or, in many cases, can be reliably inferred. Additionally, the public reports an unknown proportion of deaths of uncollared bears. Estimating the number of non-agency human-caused mortalities is a necessary element that must be factored into the total annual mortality. Here, we describe a method of estimating the number of such deaths from records of reported human-caused bear mortalities. We used a hierarchical Bayesian model with a non-informative prior distribution for the number of deaths. Estimates of reporting rates developed from deaths of radio-instrumented bears from 1983 to 2000 were used to develop beta prior probability distributions that the public will report a death. Twenty-seven known deaths of radio-instrumented bears occurred during this period with 16 reported. Additionally, fates of 23 radio-instrumented bears were unknown and are considered possible unreported mortalities. We describe 3 ways of using this information to specify prior distributions on the probability a death will be reported by the public. We estimated total deaths of noninstrumented bears in running 3-year periods from 1993 to 2000. Thirty-nine known deaths of non-instrumented bears were reported during this period, ranging from 0 to 7/year. Seven possible mortalities were recorded. We applied the method to both sets of mortality data. Results from this method can be combined with agency removals and deaths of collared bears to produce defensible estimates of total mortality over relevant periods and to incorporate uncertainty when evaluating mortality limits established for the Yellowstone grizzly bear population. Assumptions and limitations of this procedure are discussed.

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming↗
USGS1980

Effect of delayed reporting of band recoveries on survival estimates

Brownie et al. (U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Resource Publ. 131, 1978) presented 14 models based on an array of explicit assumptions for the study of survival in avian populations. These methods are replacing the life table methods previously used to estimate survival rates (e.g., Burnham and Anderson, J. Wildl. Manage. , 43: 356-366, 1979). The new methods allow survival or recovery rates, or both, to be constant, time-specific, or time- and age-specific. In studies to estimate survival rates for birds the data are often from recoveries of birds shot or found dead during the hunting season and reported to the Bird Banding Laboratory by sportsmen, conservation agency employees, or the general public. This note examines the bias in estimating annual survival due to a proportion of the recoveries being incorrectly reported a year late. Specifically, a few recoveries each year of, for example, adult male American Widgeon ( Anas americana ) banded in California are reported as being recovered in year i + 1 when in fact they were actually recovered the previous year i. Delayed reporting might typically be caused by people finding a band in their health clothing in the fall of the year and, being embarrassed about their failure to report the band when it was taken, report it a year late not mentioning the actual year of recovery. Heuristically, delayed reporting should bias estimated annual survival rates upwards because it appears from the data that the birds corresponding to the "delayed" recoveries actually lived an additional year.

Journal of Field Ornithology↗
USGS2024

Developing version 2 of satellite-estimated precipitation monthly reports for selected locations in the Republic of the Marshall Islands

The Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI; also known as the Marshall Islands) is a nation of more than 30 low-lying atolls and islands, most of which are inhabited, dispersed across an Exclusive Economic Zone over 770,000 square miles in the tropical central north Pacific Ocean. The study objectives and methods were originally presented in U.S. Geological Survey Data Report 1181 and are summarized herein. Monitoring environmental conditions for potential drought risk is challenging in such a dispersed island nation, and current drought hazard products provide generalities regarding conditions on a broad geographic scale. In 2022–23, a team of U.S. Geological Survey scientists, and managers of natural resources and natural hazards in the RMI, used Integrated Multi-satellitE Retrievals for Global Precipitation Measurement satellite estimates of precipitation to develop content and a template for timely monthly reporting of precipitation for 23 inhabited atolls and islands. After a year of report production and user feedback, the team incorporated lessons learned and revised user priorities to update the content and layout of the template. This data report describes the collaboration process and results of revising the report content and layout into version 2 of the monthly satellite-estimated precipitation report.

Data Report↗
USGS2000

Cruise report R/V Surf Surveyor cruise S1-00-CL, mapping the bathymetry of Crater Lake, Oregon

During the Spring of 1999, the US Geological Survey (USGS) Pacific Seafloor Mapping Project (PSMP) was contacted by the US National Park Service Crater Lake National Park (CLNP) to inquire about the plausibility of producing a high-resolution multibeam bathymetric map of Crater Lake. The purpose was to generate a much higher-resolution and more geographically accurate bathymetric map than was produced in 1959, the last time the lake had been surveyed. Scientific interest in various aspects of Crater Lake (aquatic biology, geochemistry, volcanic processes, etc.) has increased during the past decade but the basemap of bathymetry was woefully inadequate. Funds were gathered during the early part of 2000 and the mapping began in late July, 2000. Crater Lake (see fig. 1 in report) is located in south central Oregon (see fig. 2 in report) within the Cascades Range, a chain of volcanoes that stretches from northern California to southern British Columbia. Crater Lake is the collapsed caldera of Mt. Mazama from a climatic eruption about 7700-yr ago (Nelson et al., 1988; Bacon and Lanphere, 1990; Bacon et al., 1997). The floor of Crater Lake has only been mapped three times since the lake was first stumbled upon by gold prospectors in the 1853. The first survey was carried by out by William G. Steel during a joint USGS-US Army expedition under the direction of Maj. Clarence E. Dutton in 1886 (Dutton, 1889). Steel�s mapping survey collected 186 soundings using a Millers lead-line sounding machine (see fig.3 in report). The resulting map (see fig.4 in report) shows only soundings and no attempts were made to generate contours. The second survey, conducted in 1959 by the US Coast and Geodetic Survey, mapped the bathymetry of Crater Lake with an acoustic echo sounder using radar navigation and collected 4000 soundings. The data were contoured by Williams (1961) and Byrne (1962) and the result is a fairly detailed map of the large-scale features of Crater Lake (see fig. 5 in report). The third mapping survey, the one of this report, was a joint USGS-NPS project carried out under a Cooperative Agreement with the Center for Coastal and Ocean Mapping, University of New Hampshire. The 2000 survey used a Kongsberg Simrad EM1002 high-resolution multibeam mapping system owned and operated by C&C Technologies, Inc. of Lafayette, LA.

Oregon↗
USGS2001

Citizen knowledge and perception of black-tailed prairie dog management: Report to respondents

What do citizens know about black-tailed prairie dogs, and where do they get their information? When management decisions need to be made regarding an animal such as the black-tailed prairie dog, an understanding of the species and its relationship to humans is necessary. This includes knowing the biology of the animal, where it lives, and how it interacts with other animals. But it is equally important for those making decisions about the species to understand citizens’ knowledge and perceptions so managers can effectively communicate with the public and help the public participate in planning and decision making activities. Unfortunately, what is known about public knowledge, perception, and preferences concerning prairie dog management is limited to data from only a few areas. This study attempts to answer the question: What do people in the short-grass prairie region of the United States know and think about black-tailed prairie dogs? In the summer of 2000, we sent a survey by mail to citizens of rural, urban, and suburban counties in the short-grass prairie region of the United States. This area includes all or part of 11 states: Arizona, Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming (see Figure 1, p. 4). A total of 1933 citizens completed the survey for a 56% response rate (Table 1). This report provides a summary of the answers for all the questions in the survey. (Extra copies of this report can be downloaded from our website: http://www.mesc.usgs.gov/seias.) The results show that although people do not believe prairie dogs are a big environmental issue, they favor a balanced approach when dealing with such problems. When asked about their views on environmental policy, respondents reported being more conservative than liberal: 40% reported slightly conservative or conservative environmental views, 24% reported moderate environmental views, and 19% reported slightly liberal or liberal environmental views. Ninteen percent (19%) said they did not know or had not thought about their environmental values. When asked how important black-tailed prairie dogs are compared to other environmental problems, 69% said they are less important than other issues or not an issue at all. Thirty one percent (31%) said prairie dogs are about the same or more important than other issues.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2006

Reported historic asbestos prospects and natural asbestos occurrences in the central United States

This map and its accompanying dataset provide information for 26 natural asbestos occurrences in the Central United States (U.S.), using descriptions found in the geologic literature. Data on location, mineralogy, geology, and relevant literature for each asbestos site are provided. Using the map and digital data in this report, the user can examine the distribution of previously reported asbestos occurrences and their geological characteristics in the Central U.S. This report is part of an ongoing study by the U.S. Geological Survey to identify and map reported natural asbestos occurrences in the U.S., which began with U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2005-1189 (http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1189/). These reports are intended to provide State and local government agencies and other stakeholders with geologic information on natural occurrences of asbestos in the U.S.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2011

Reported historic asbestos mines, historic asbestos prospects, and other natural occurrences of asbestos in California

The map (Plate.pdf), pamphlet (Pamphlet.pdf), and the accompanying datasets in this report provide information for 290 sites in California where asbestos occurs in natural settings, using descriptions found in the geologic literature. Data on location, mineralogy, geology, and relevant literature for each asbestos site are provided. Using the map and digital data in this report, the user can examine the distribution of previously reported asbestos and their geological characteristics in California. This report is part of an ongoing study by the U.S. Geological Survey to identify and map sites where asbestos mineralization occurs in the United States, which includes similar maps and datasets of natural asbestos localities within the Eastern United States (http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1189/), the Central United States (http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2006/1211/), the Rocky Mountain States (http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2007/1182/), the Southwestern United States (http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1095/), and the Northwestern United States (Oregon and Washington) (http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1041/). These reports are intended to provide State and local government agencies and other stakeholders with geologic information on reported asbestos mineralization in the United States.

California↗
USGS2011

U.S. Geological Survey Science for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative-2010 Annual Report

This is the third report produced by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative (WLCI) to detail annual work activities. The first report described activities for 2007 and 2008, and the second report covered work activities for FY09. This third report covers work activities conducted in FY2010, and it continues the 2009 approach of reporting on all the individual activities to help give WLCI partners and other readers the full scope of what has been accomplished. New in this year's report is an additional section for each work activity that outlines the work planned for the following fiscal year. In FY2010, there were 35 ongoing/expanded, completed, or new projects conducted under the five major multi-disciplinary science and technical-assistance activities: (1) Baseline Synthesis; (2) Targeted Monitoring and Research; (3) Data and Information Management; (4) Integration and Coordination; and (5) Decisionmaking and Evaluation. The three new work activities were to (1) compile existing water data for the entire WLCI region and (2) develop regional curves (statistical models) for relating bankfull-channel geometry and discharge to drainages in the WLCI region, both of which will help guide long-term monitoring of water resources; and (3) initiate a groundwater-monitoring network to evaluate potential effects of energy-development activities on groundwater quality where groundwater is an important source of public/private water supplies. Results of the FY2009 work to develop methods for assessing soil organic matter and mercury indicated that selenium and arsenic levels may be elevated in the Muddy Creek Basin; thus, the focus of that activity was shifted in FY2010 to evaluate biogeochemical cycling of elements in the basin. In FY2010, two ongoing activities were expanded with the addition of more sampling plots: (a) the study of how greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) use vegetation-treatment areas (sites added to the Moxa Arch Natural Gas Development area) and (2) the study of cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) occurrence in burn treatments of the Little Mountain Ecosystem. The activity that entails evaluating relationships between ungulate herbivory and fire on aspen (Populus tremuloides) recruitment also was expanded to include relationships between stand characteristics of and herbivory on aspen in various ecohydrological settings. The USGS continued compiling data and developing geospatial products from all of its WLCI activities to support (1) ranking and prioritizing of proposed conservation projects, (2) developing the WLCI Integrated Assessment, and (3) developing the WLCI 5-year Conservation Action Plan. Two activities were completed in FY2010: (1) the conceptual modeling and indicator selection for monitoring resource conditions across the WLCI region, and (2) the literature review on effects of oil and gas development in western regions of the United States, both of which are in the last stages of publication.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2013

Integrating Federal and State data records to report progress in establishing agricultural conservation practices on Chesapeake Bay farms

In response to the Executive Order for Chesapeake Bay Protection and Restoration (E.O. #13508, May 12, 2009), the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) took on the task of acquiring and assessing agricultural conservation practice data records for U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) programs, and transferred those datasets in aggregated format to State jurisdictional agencies for use in reporting conservation progress to the Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership (CBP Partnership). Under the guidelines and regulations that have been developed to protect and restore water-quality in the Chesapeake Bay, the six State jurisdictions that fall within the Chesapeake Bay watershed are required to report their progress in promoting agricultural conservation practices to the CBP Partnership on an annual basis. The installation and adoption of agricultural best management practices is supported by technical and financial assistance from both Federal and State conservation programs. The farm enrollment data for USDA conservation programs are confidential, but agencies can obtain access to the privacy-protected data if they are established as USDA Conservation Cooperators. The datasets can also be released to the public if they are first aggregated to protect farmer privacy. In 2012, the USGS used its Conservation Cooperator status to obtain implementation data for conservation programs sponsored by the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and the USDA Farm Service Agency (FSA) for farms within the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Three jurisdictions (Delaware, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia) used the USGS-provided aggregated dataset to report conservation progress in 2012, whereas the remaining three jurisdictions (Maryland, New York, and Virginia) used jurisdictional Conservation Cooperator Agreements to obtain privacy-protected data directly from the USDA. This report reviews the status of conservation data sharing between the USDA and the various jurisdictions, discusses the methods that were used by the USGS in 2012 to collect and process USDA agricultural conservation data, and also documents methods that were used by the jurisdictions to integrate Federal and State data records, reduce double counting, and provide an accurate reporting of conservation practices to the CBP Partnership’s Annual Progress Review. A similar tracking, reporting, and assessment will occur in future years, as State and Federal governments and nongovernmental organizations continue to work with farmers and conservation districts to reduce the impacts of agriculture on water-quality.

Delaware; Maryland; New York; Pennsylvania;Virgini↗
USGS1952

Stratigraphic sections of the Phosphoria formation in Idaho (third Idaho report)

The first of a series of reports giving detailed stratigraphic sections of the Phosphoria formation in the Western phosphate field as measured and described by the Geological Survey will soon be published as Circulars. Because of the needs of industry for many of these data during the 1951 field season, and in view of the unavoidable delays attendant on publication, the tabular data to be included in five of these Circulars have already been placed on open file in simple reproduction form (prepared by Ozalid from photographic negatives) and without explanatory text so that early use could be made of the data. The first four sets of tables, one each for the states of Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, and Utah, were released on open file on August 15, 1951, A second Idaho report was released on October 4, 1951. This report includes data of the same character but of samples from different localities and is the third report on samples from Idaho. The tables include name and location of section measured, brief description of geologic setting, acknowledgments for field and analytical work, abstract data on the sections (bed number, rock name, sample number, and thickness), and analytical data on the samples. The analytical data include reports on P 2 O 5 and acid insoluble for all samples and additional analyses, such as Al 2 O 3 , Fe 2 O 3 , and loss on ignition for selected samples. These reports are placed on open file at the offices of the Geological Survey in Washinton, D. C., Spokane, Washington, Salt Lake City, Utah, and Montpelier, Idaho, and at the offices of the Idaho Bureau of Mines and Geology, Moscow, Idaho, the Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology, Butte, Montana, the Wyoming Geological Survey, Laramie, Wyoming, and the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.

Idaho↗
USGS1974

Selected U.S. Bureau of Mines reports on Alaska indexed by quadrangle

Most U.S. Bureau of Mines reports on the geology and mineral resources of Alaska that were published or placed in open files through April 30, 1974, are listed by the quadrangles (scale 1:250,000) into which Alaska has been divided for topographic mapping (p. 2). References to reports that deal with Alaska as a whole and cannot be readily assigned to individual quadrangles or deal with many scattered parts of the state are listed under ALASKA - GENERAL, which appears before the alphabetically arranged quadrangle listings. References to the Minerals Yearbook, published annually, are not included as this periodical contains mainly statistical data. Also omitted are reports on mining, milling, and metallurgical practices; compilations of coal, oil, and gas analyses unless data on geological occurrences are also given; and reports on permissible explosives, health, and safety. This index is the second in a planned series of specialized lists, arranged by quadrangle, that will facilitate library research on the geology and mineral resources of Alaska. The first in the series is "Geological Survey open-file reports on Alaska indexed by quadrangle," by Edward H. Cobb, which was released as open-file report 74-7 on May 16, 1974.

Alaska↗
USGS1978

Selected Geological Survey, U.S. Bureau of Mines, and Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys reports and maps on Alaska released during 1977, indexed by quadrangle

This open-file report lists all Geological Survey, U.S. Bureau of Mines, and State of Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys reports and maps on the geology, geophysics, and mineral and water resources of Alaska published or released to open files in 1977. They are listed by the quadrangles (scale 1:250,000) into which Alaska has been subdivided for topographic mapping (p. 3). As these three agencies also issued reports and maps on other subjects, the following lists are selected in the sense that such documents are not included. Most of the listed reports and maps bear a 1977 imprint date; a few with earlier imprint dates actually were not delivered until 1977. Reports that deal with regional tectonic hypotheses, regional syntheses, Alaska as a whole, or with areas that can not be identified with a specific quadrangle are listed under Alaska - General, as are statistical presentations, indexes, and the like. Reports and maps that deal with offshore areas not within quadrangle boundaries are listed under Offshore Areas. The Alaska - General and Offshore Areas lists appear before the alphabetically arranged quadrangle listings. This index is intended to bring up to date the other indexes of this series, which are listed on p. 2.

Alaska↗
USGS1978

Report on laboratory testing of shallow sediments, Middle Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf

This report contains the results of geotechnical engineering testing on cores taken by the U.S. Geological Survey to evaluate the characteristics of the sea floor within the Baltimore Canyon Trough area. The coring took place in September, 1977 aboard the R/V ANNANDALE. During the cruise (AN-01-77), 20 vibracores were taken at 17 stations across the Continental Shelf off the coast of New Jersey (Figure 1). Table 1 shows the station locations, the water depths at each station, and the core lengths. The objective of the study was to obtain a set of representative index properties as well as strength and compressibility data on sediments from across the shelf in the Baltimore Canyon Trough area. It was anticipated that these data, although of a reconnaissance rather than a site-specific nature, would provide a useful indication of the engineering properties of these sediments. Ultimately, these data may be used for preliminary design applications and the assessment of potential hazards. In this report, the results are presented without any interpretation. An overall evaluation of all data collected during the study, including those contained in this report, presently is underway. Users of this report should be cautioned not to take these test results out of context. Two factors must be borne in mind. The first is that these tests were done on somewhat disturbed samples compared with those obtained through high-quality sampling programs onshore. Much disturbance is inevitable offshore but the significance of the disturbance on these test results has not yet been evaluated. The second factor is that these data are only part of the total set available from this project. A complete analysis of all data may lead to conclusions that are different from those based on this set of data only. The tests reported herein were performed by Geotechnical Engineers Inc., 1017 Main Street, Winchester, Massachusetts 01890, under Contract 14-08-0001-16232 of the U.S. Geological Survey. Richard Brown and Charles Osgood performed the engineering properties tests. Sally A. Wood of the U.S. Geological Survey handled the transfer of vibracores between the U.S. Geological Survey and Geotechnical Engineers Inc. and, also, assisted in the preparation of this report.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1979

Selected Geological Survey, U.S. Bureau of Mines, and Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical surveys reports and maps on Alaska released during 1978, indexed by quadrangle

This open—file report lists all Geological Survey, U.S. Bureau of Mines, and State of Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys reports and maps on the geology, geophysics, and mineral and water resources of Alaska published or released to open files in 1978. They are listed by the quadrangles (scale 1:250,000) into which Alaska has been subdivided for topographic mapping (p. 4). As these three agencies also issued reports and maps on other subjects, the following lists are selected in the sense that such documents are not included. Most of the listed reports and maps bear a 1978 imprint date; a few with earlier imprint dates actually were not delivered until 1978. Reports that deal with regional tectonic hypotheses, regional syntheses, Alaska as a whole, or with areas that can not be identified with a specific quadrangle are listed under Alaska — General, as are statistical presentations, indexes, and the like. Reports and maps that deal with offshore areas not within quadrangle boundaries are listed under Offshore Areas. The Alaska — General and Offshore Areas lists appear before the alphabetically arranged quadrangle listings.

Alaska↗
USGS1982

Update 1, May 1982: Outer Continental Shelf and onshore oil and gas activities and impacts in the Arctic: a summary report, October 1981

In October 1981, the Office of Outer Continental Shelf Information(OCSI) of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) published the initial summary report for the Arctic subregion of Alaska, the Arctic Summary Report, October 1981 (Jackson and others, USGS Open-File Report 81-621). This report is the first update to the initial report. Updates are published approximately every 6 months in order to provide additional and revised information. A revised summary report is published only when a new Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) lease sale is held or if a commercial discovery is announced on the OCS in that region.

Alaska↗
USGS1988

Programs for generating data tables for the annual water-resources data report of the U.S. Geological Survey

The U.S. Geological Survey has developed software that interfaces with the Automated Data Processing System to facilitate and expedite preparation of the annual water-resources data report. This software incorporates a feature that prepares daily values tables and appends them to previously edited files containing station manuscripts. Other features collate the merged files with miscellaneous sections of the report. The report is then printed as page-size, camera-ready copy. All system components reside on a minicomputer; this provides easy access and use by remote field offices. Automation of the annual report preparation process results in significant savings of labor and cost. Use of the system for producing the 1986 annual report in the North Carolina District realized a labor savings of over two man-months. A fully implemented system would produce a greater savings and speed release of the report to users.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1990

Report planning, preparation and review guide

The guide describes critical steps in the planning, preparation, and review of hydrologic projects and reports. Project and report planning and organization are discussed first. Report writing and guidelines for writing selected parts of the report are covered next. The last topics covered are editorial and technical review. The guide contains examples of good and poor writing, report checklists, and source references to assist authors in the various stages of report preparation.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1980

Waterfowl status report, 1976

This report contains information from the 1975-76 midwinter waterfowl survey, the 1976 waterfowl breeding population and production surveys, and the waterfowl harvest surveys for the 1975-76 hunting season. This information was provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Canadian Wildlife Service, and various cooperating State wildlife conservation agencies. Winter surveys are composed of the midwinter survey reports submitted from each of the four flyways and the midwinter survey covering a portion of the west coast of Mexico. The breeding ground surveys section is composed of many individual reports that provide breeding population and production estimates for most waterfowl species within a major portion of their breeding range. The waterfowl harvest survey provides estimates of waterfowl hunting activity and success. Information from surveys of the wintering and breeding populations of waterfowl, coupled with data from the annual harvest survey, are instrumental in developing annual hunting regulations for waterfowl. Credit has been given to each individual or organization that submitted a report. Although some of the narrative statements have been condensed and a few tables deleted or condensed if they contain data presented elsewhere in this report, the essential information from each report has been retained. The breeding grounds survey strata (Fig. 1) for areas surveyed by Fish and Wildlife Service crews were renumbered in 1974.

Special Scientific Report - Wildlife↗