USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Publication”

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 1,639 records · Page 91Linked to original sources
USGS2015

The quality of our Nation's waters: Water quality in the glacial aquifer system, northern United States, 1993-2009

The glacial aquifer system underlies much of the northern United States. About one-sixth (41 million people) of the United States population relies on the glacial aquifer system for drinking water. The primary importance of the glacial aquifer system is as a source of water for public supply to the population centers in the region, but the aquifer system also provides drinking water for domestic use to individual homes and small communities in rural areas. Withdrawals from this aquifer system for public supply are the largest in the Nation and play a key role in the economic development of parts of 26 States. Corn production has increased in the central part of the aquifer system over the last 10 years, and the increased production increases the need for water for agricultural use and the need for increased use of agrochemicals. Additionally, the steady increase in population (15 million people over the last 40 years) in urban and rural areas is resulting in an increased reliance on the glacial aquifer system for high-quality drinking water. The need to monitor, understand, and maintain the water quality of this valuable economic resource continues to grow. Major Findings Contaminants from geologic source—in particular arsenic and manganese—in groundwater used for drinking are a potential concern for human health Concentrations of nitrate and pesticides in groundwater were low in fine-grained sediment even in areas of intensive agriculture Chloride concentrations in groundwater are increasing in urban areas “Nuisance” constituents in groundwater from the glacial aquifer system could limit groundwater use

Circular↗
USGS2015

The quality of our Nation's waters: Water quality in the Northern Atlantic Coastal Plain surficial aquifer system, Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, and Virginia, 1988-2009

The surficial aquifer system of the Northern Atlantic Coastal Plain is made up of unconfined aquifers that underlie most of the area. This aquifer system is a critical renewable source of drinking water and is the source of most flow to streams and of recharge to underlying confined aquifers. Millions of people rely on the surficial aquifer system for public and domestic water supply, in particular in the densely populated areas of Long Island, New York, and in southern New Jersey, but also in more rural areas. Because the aquifer sediments are permeable and the water table is shallow, the surficial aquifer system is vulnerable to contamination from chemicals that are applied to the land surface and carried into groundwater with infiltrating rainfall and snowfall. Major Findings The quality of most groundwater produced for public and domestic water supply is suitable for drinking, although contaminants at concentrations greater than human-health benchmarks have been detected in some places Nitrate is one of the most widespread contaminants in groundwater Radium occurs commonly in groundwater as a result of the degradation of uranium and thorium minerals naturally present in aquifer sediments Chemicals in groundwater move slowly and can be detected in the environment for several decades after they enter the surficial aquifer system

Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, North Ca↗
USGS2011

Effects of three high-flow experiments on the Colorado River ecosystem downstream from Glen Canyon Dam, Arizona

Three high-flow experiments (HFEs) were conducted by the U.S. Department of the Interior at Glen Canyon Dam, Arizona, in March 1996, November 2004, and March 2008. These experiments, also known as artificial or controlled floods, were large-volume, scheduled releases of water from Glen Canyon Dam that were designed to mimic some aspects of pre-dam Colorado River seasonal flooding. The goal of these experiments was to determine whether high flows could be used to benefit important physical and biological resources in Glen Canyon National Recreation Area and Grand Canyon National Park that had been affected by the operation of Glen Canyon Dam. Efforts such as HFEs that seek to maintain and restore downstream resources are undertaken by the U.S. Department of the Interior under the auspices of the Grand Canyon Protection Act of 1992 (GCPA; title XVIII, secs. 1801-1809, of Public Law 102-575). Scientists conducted a wide range of monitoring and research activities before, during, and after the experiments. Initially, research efforts focused on whether HFEs could be used to rebuild and maintain Grand Canyon sandbars, which provide camping beaches for hikers and whitewater rafters, create habitats potentially used by native fish and other wildlife, and are the source of windborne sand that may help to protect some archaeological resources from weathering and erosion. As scientists gained a better understanding of how HFEs affect the physical environment, research efforts expanded to include additional investigations about the effects of HFEs on biological resources, such as native fishes, nonnative sports fishes, riverside vegetation, and the aquatic food web. The chapters that follow summarize and synthesize for decisionmakers and the public what has been learned about HFEs to provide a framework for implementing similar future experiments. This report is a product of the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program (GCDAMP), a Federal initiative authorized to ensure that the primary mandate of the GCPA (GCPA sec. 1802 (a)) is met through advances in information and resource management. The program and its research efforts focus on a study area that encompasses the Colorado River corridor from the forebay of Glen Canyon Dam to the western boundary of Grand Canyon National Park, which is identified as the Colorado River ecosystem elsewhere in this report. The study area includes the approximately 16-mile river corridor between the dam and Lees Ferry within Glen Canyon National Recreation Area and the entire 277-river mile corridor downstream from Lees Ferry and within Grand Canyon National Park. The U.S. Geological Survey's Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center (GCMRC) is responsible for the scientific monitoring and research efforts of the GCDAMP, including the preparation of this report. The GCMRC gratefully acknowledges the contributions of those scientists with Federal and State resource-management agencies, academic institutions, and private consulting firms who undertook much of the research presented in the chapters that follow.

Circular↗
USGS2011

Development of industrial minerals in Colorado

Technology and engineering have helped make mining safer and cleaner for both humans and the environment. Inevitably, mineral development entails costs as well as benefits. Developing a mine is an environmental, engineering, and planning challenge that must conform to many Federal, State, and local regulations. Community collaboration, creative design, and best management practices of sustainability and biodiversity can be positive indicators for the mining industry. A better understanding of aesthetics, culture, economics, geology, climate, vegetation and wildlife, topography, historical significance, and regional land planning is important in resolving land-use issues and managing mineral resources wisely. Ultimately, the consuming public makes choices about product use (including water, food, highways, housing, and thousands of other items) that influence operations of the mineral industry. Land planners, resource managers, earth scientists, designers, and public groups have a responsibility to consider sound scientific information, society's needs, and community appeals in making smart decisions concerning resource use and how complex landscapes should change. An effort to provide comprehensive geosciences data for land management agencies in central Colorado was undertaken in 2003 by scientists of the U.S. Geological Survey and the Colorado Geological Survey. This effort, the Central Colorado Assessment Project, addressed a variety of land-use issues: an understanding of the availability of industrial and metallic rocks and minerals, the geochemical and environmental effects of historic mining activity on surface water and groundwater, and the geologic controls on the availability and quality of groundwater. The USDA Forest Service and other land management agencies have the opportunity to contribute to the sustainable management of natural aggregate and other mineral resources through the identification and selective development of mineral resources and the reclamation of mines on lands that they administer. The information in this Circular will help them carry out that task.

Colorado↗
USGS2011

Geology for a changing world 2010-2020-Implementing the U.S. Geological Survey science strategy

This report describes a science strategy for the geologic activities of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the years 2010-2020. It presents six goals with accompanying strategic actions and products that implement the science directions of USGS Circular 1309, 'Facing Tomorrow's Challenges-U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007-2017.' These six goals focus on providing the geologic underpinning needed to wisely use our natural resources, understand and mitigate hazards and environmental change, and understand the relationship between humans and the environment. The goals emphasize the critical role of the USGS in providing long-term research, monitoring, and assessments for the Nation and the world. Further, they describe measures that must be undertaken to ensure geologic expertise and knowledge for the future. The natural science issues facing today's world are complex and cut across many scientific disciplines. The Earth is a system in which atmosphere, oceans, land, and life are all connected. Rocks and soils contain the answers to important questions about the origin of energy and mineral resources, the evolution of life, climate change, natural hazards, ecosystem structures and functions, and the movements of nutrients and toxicants. The science of geology has the power to help us understand the processes that link the physical and biological world so that we can model and forecast changes in the system. Ensuring the success of this strategy will require integration of geological knowledge with the other natural sciences and extensive collaboration across USGS science centers and with partners in Federal, State, and local agencies, academia, industry, nongovernmental organizations and, most importantly, the American public. The first four goals of this report describe the scientific issues facing society in the next 10 years and the actions and products needed to respond to these issues. The final two goals focus on the expertise and infrastructure needed to ensure the long-term sustainability of the geological sciences in the USGS. The ultimate goal of USGS science and of the strategy laid out in this document is to contribute to the development of a sustainable society that operates in harmony with the Earth systems that society depends upon. As we begin the second decade of the 21st century, our Nation faces growing challenges in resource availability, climate and environmental change, and natural hazards. Meeting these challenges will require strong collaboration across the natural and social sciences and extensive partnerships with both the public and private sectors. The six goals described in this document represent a mix of scientific focus areas and operational necessities that together provide a comprehensive roadmap for USGS geologic science to effectively contribute to the USGS mission, providing science for a changing world.

Circular↗
USGS2013

U.S. Geological Survey environmental health science strategy — Providing environmental health science for a changing world

Executive Summary America has an abundance of natural resources. We have bountiful clean water, fertile soil, and unrivaled national parks, wildlife refuges, and public lands. These resources enrich our lives and preserve our health and wellbeing. These resources have been maintained because of our history of respect for their value and an enduring commitment to their vigilant protection. Awareness of the social, economic, and personal value of the health of our environment is increasing. The emergence of environmentally driven diseases caused by exposure to contaminants and pathogens is a growing concern worldwide. New health threats and patterns of established threats are affected by both natural and anthropogenic changes to the environment. Human activities are key drivers of emerging (new and re-emerging) health threats. Societal demands for land and natural resources, quality of life, and economic prosperity lead to environmental change. Natural earth processes, climate trends, and related climatic events will compound the environmental impact of human activities. These environmental drivers will influence exposure to disease agents, including viral, bacterial, prion, and fungal pathogens, parasites, synthetic chemicals and substances, natural earth materials, toxins, and other biogenic compounds. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) defines environmental health science broadly as the interdisciplinary study of relations among the quality of the physical environment, the health of the living environment, and human health. The interactions among these three spheres are driven by human activities, ecological processes, and natural earth processes; the interactions affect exposure to contaminants and pathogens and the severity of environmentally driven diseases in animals and people. This definition provides USGS with a framework for synthesizing natural science information from across the Bureau and providing it to environmental, natural resource, agricultural, and public health managers. USGS specializes in science at the environment-health interface, by characterizing the processes that affect the interaction among the physical environment, the living environment, and people, and the resulting factors that affect ecological and human exposure to disease agents. The USGS is a Federal science agency with a broad range of natural science expertise relevant to environmental health. USGS provides scientific information and tools as a scientific basis for management and policy decisionmaking. This report describes a 10-year strategy that encompasses the portfolio of USGS environmental health science. It summarizes national environmental health priorities that USGS is best suited to address, and will serve as a strategic framework for USGS environmental health science goals, actions, and outcomes for the next decade. Implementation of this strategy is intended to aid coordination of USGS environmental health activities and to provide a focal point for disseminating information to stakeholders. The “One Health” paradigm advocated by the World Health Organization (WHO; World Health Organization, 2011), and the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA; American Veterinary Medical Association, 2008), among others, is based on a general recognition that the health of humans, animals, and the environment are inextricably linked. Thus, successful efforts to protect that health will require increased interdisciplinary research and increased communication and collaboration among the broader scientific and health community. This strategy is built upon that paradigm.

Circular↗
USGS2013

Progress toward establishing a national assessment of water availability and use

The Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-11) was passed into law on March 30, 2009. Subtitle F, also known as the SECURE Water Act, calls for the establishment of a "national water availability and use assessment program" within the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). A major driver for this recommendation was that national water availability and use have not been comprehensively assessed since 1978. This report fulfills a requirement to report to Congress on progress in implementing the national water availability and use assessment program, also referred to as the National Water Census. The SECURE Water Act authorized \$20 million for each of fiscal years (FY) 2009 through 2023 for assessment of national water availability and use. The first appropriation for this effort was \$4 million in FY 2011, followed by an appropriation of \$6 million in FY 2012. The National Water Census synthesizes and reports information at the regional and national scales, with an emphasis on compiling and reporting the information in a way that is useful to states and others responsible for water management and natural-resource issues. The USGS works with Federal and non-Federal agencies, universities, and other organizations to ensure that the information can be aggregated with other types of water-availability and socioeconomic information, such as data on food and energy production. To maximize the utility of the information, the USGS coordinates the design and development of the effort through the Federal Advisory Committee on Water Information. A National Water Census is a complex undertaking, particularly because there are major gaps in the information needed to conduct such an assessment. To maximize progress, the USGS engaged stakeholders in a discussion of priorities and leveraged existing studies and program activities to enhance efforts toward the development of a National Water Census.

Circular↗
USGS2017

Reducing risk where tectonic plates collide—U.S. Geological Survey subduction zone science plan

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) serves the Nation by providing reliable scientific information and tools to build resilience in communities exposed to subduction zone earthquakes, tsunamis, landslides, and volcanic eruptions. Improving the application of USGS science to successfully reduce risk from these events relies on whole community efforts, with continuing partnerships among scientists and stakeholders, including researchers from universities, other government labs and private industry, land-use planners, engineers, policy-makers, emergency managers and responders, business owners, insurance providers, the media, and the general public. Motivated by recent technological advances and increased awareness of our growing vulnerability to subduction-zone hazards, the USGS is uniquely positioned to take a major step forward in the science it conducts and products it provides, building on its tradition of using long-term monitoring and research to develop effective products for hazard mitigation. This science plan provides a blueprint both for prioritizing USGS science activities and for delineating USGS interests and potential participation in subduction zone science supported by its partners. The activities in this plan address many USGS stakeholder needs: High-fidelity tools and user-tailored information that facilitate increasingly more targeted, neighborhood-scale decisions to mitigate risks more cost-effectively and ensure post-event operability. Such tools may include maps, tables, and simulated earthquake ground-motion records conveying shaking intensity and frequency. These facilitate the prioritization of retrofitting of vulnerable infrastructure; Information to guide local land-use and response planning to minimize development in likely hazardous zones (for example, databases, maps, and scenario documents to guide evacuation route planning in communities near volcanoes, along coastlines vulnerable to tsunamis, and built on landslide-prone terrain); New tools to assess the potential for cascading hazards, such as landslides, tsunamis, coastal changes, and flooding caused by earthquakes or volcanic eruptions; Geospatial models of permanent, widespread land- and sea-level changes that may occur in the immediate aftermath of great ( M ≥8.0) subduction zone earthquakes; Strong partnerships between scientists and public safety providers for effective decision making during periods of elevated hazard and risk; Accurate forecasts of far-reaching hazards (for example, ash clouds, tsunamis) to avert catastrophes and unnecessary disruptions in air and sea transportation; Aftershock forecasts to guide decisions about when and where to re-enter, repair, or rebuild buildings and infrastructure, for all types of subduction zone earthquakes.

Circular↗
USGS2020

USGS Cascades Volcano Observatory news media management guide — General protocols and templates

This guide describes general protocols and provides templates for news media management at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Cascades Volcano Observatory (CVO) and is intended for use by the CVO scientist-in-charge, communications staff, scientists, and guest communications colleagues. This public version, with CVO names and contact information removed, may be useful to other agencies developing their own protocols and templates. This guide evolved from a smaller document hastily assembled out of necessity during the complex and overwhelming news media interest in the 2004–2008 Mount St. Helens eruption. News media interest exceeded the need for life-saving crisis communication and foretold of the need for future multi-faceted and well-coordinated news media and social media responses during future volcanic events. This guide accompanies the USGS Volcano Science Center’s (VSC’s) general guidelines and protocols for how communications staff at all VSC observatories will work together to respond to news media requests. The protocols and templates are applicable to (1) normal conditions when CVO has an opportunity to be proactive with its messages and to raise general awareness, (2) general responses to news media and TV documentary inquiries, (3) intense news media interest where the responsibility to communicate information and hazards rests primarily with staff at CVO, and (4) intense and overwhelming news media interest that requires a multiagency response. This guide reflects general protocols in effect at the time of publication. The information will be modified as conditions change. Although “news media” generally refers to traditional outlets such as TV, radio, and newspapers, the protocols used to engage these traditional outlets apply also when responding to bloggers, online news services, and social media comments.

Circular↗
USGS2021

U.S. Geological Survey landscape science strategy 2020–2030

Across our Nation, multiple Federal, State, Tribal, and local governments are working with stakeholders and landowners to restore, conserve, and manage lands and resources to benefit fish, wildlife, and people. One of the largest Federal efforts is led by the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), with multiple DOI agencies working to conserve and manage public lands, resources, and cultural heritage for the benefit and enjoyment of current and future generations. As a science provider within the DOI, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has an important role in developing actionable science products that can inform decision making on public lands and across all of our Nation’s landscapes. Our landscapes and resources are undergoing continual change from a complex and interacting suite of stressors that include traditional and nontraditional land uses, a changing climate, a dynamic economy, and a culturally diverse and ever-changing society. Landscape science seeks to understand how the physical, biological, and social components of ecosystems and landscapes interact with each other and are affected by these stressors across local to global scales. The USGS has developed this landscape science strategy to focus and strengthen the agency’s efforts to inform critical conservation, restoration, and management decisions for American landscapes. The strategy directly supports the overarching 21st-century science strategy of the USGS and expands our perspective and focus on partnerships, including with internal, external, traditional, and nontraditional partners. The vision for USGS landscape science is to integrate multiple disciplines and approaches to create and deliver relevant, timely, and scientifically sound products that enable our partners to make informed decisions about how to manage complex interacting natural and human systems across changing American landscapes. This strategy seeks to leverage the expertise, data, analytical capacity, and tools of the agency and to strengthen integration of science efforts across programs and scales. A cornerstone of the strategy is working closely with landowners and resource managers to identify the science that is needed to inform management actions, and then working collaboratively with those same partners to coproduce science and data products that are timely, practical, and useful for their decision making. Many individual efforts within the USGS already embrace landscape science ideas and practices. With the development of this strategy, we are seeking to build on these efforts and to focus agency attention and expertise on expanding, connecting, and institutionalizing core practices and approaches for landscape science that produces actionable science products and tools that decision makers can use to help conserve and manage American landscapes.

Circular↗
USGS2023

Integrated science strategy for assessing and monitoring water availability and migratory birds for terminal lakes across the Great Basin, United States

Executive Summary In 2022, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) established the Saline Lake Ecosystems Integrated Water Availability Assessment (IWAAs) to monitor and assess the hydrology of terminal lakes in the Great Basin and the migratory birds and other wildlife dependent on those habitats. Scientists from across the USGS (with specialties in water quantity, water quality, limnology, avian biology, data science, landscape ecology, and science communication) formed the Saline Lake Ecosystems IWAAs Team. The team has developed this regional strategic science plan to guide data collection and assessment activities at terminal lakes in the Great Basin. The U.S. Congress requested the USGS to establish the Saline Lake Ecosystems IWAAs in response to historically low water levels at terminal lakes and associated wetlands across the Great Basin. Not all Great Basin terminal lakes have high salinity; however, all terminal lakes occur in endorheic, closed, basins with no surface-water outflow. Low lake levels across the Great Basin are the result of increased water use for agriculture and municipalities, drought conditions, and a warming climate. Great Basin terminal lake water extents have decreased by as much as 90 percent over the last 150 years, and terminal lake wetlands have decreased in area by as much as 47 percent since 1984. Lake elevations and wetland areas are primarily supported by freshwater inputs from snowmelt feeding upgradient rivers, streams, and springs. These freshwater inputs have been severely reduced because of continued and increased surface-water diversions and surface-water capture through groundwater pumping for agriculture, mining, and public supply as well as unprecedented drought conditions and warming temperatures related to climate change. Water quality, specifically salinity, is highly variable for terminal lakes of the Great Basin, and this variability is a result of the balance between freshwater inflow and evaporation. Variability of salinity at each of the terminal lakes can be affected by lake morphology, hydrogeologic features of the basin, annual variability in weather patterns, and changes in upgradient water use. Hypersaline terminal lakes provide abundant food resources such as brine shrimp and brine flies that support nesting and migrating birds. The density and composition of invertebrates are closely tied to lake salinity. Increased salinity can exceed the tolerance of invertebrates, severely limiting their biomass. In contrast, decreased salinity can lead to altered invertebrate community composition, reducing the abundance of optimal avian prey resources. Great Basin terminal lake ecosystems, including open-water and adjacent aquatic and terrestrial environments, provide resources necessary to sustain many animal populations throughout the year. Although a variety of taxa use terminal lakes, these ecosystems are of acute importance for the millions of migratory waterbirds (for example, shorebirds, wading birds, and waterfowl) dependent on the network of terminal lakes and their associated wetlands. Migratory birds transiting the Pacific and Central Flyways use Great Basin terminal lake ecosystems throughout the year to feed, nest, and transit between wintering and breeding ranges. As such, successful conservation of birds and their habitats requires coordinated management of water and habitats across the Great Basin network of terminal lakes and wetlands. The linkages between water availability and ecosystem vulnerability of terminal lakes in the Great Basin are not well understood. The vulnerability of terminal lakes is related to the factors driving change and adaptive capacity of the lake ecosystem. Saline lake ecosystems are vulnerable when changes in water quantity affect ecosystem function. Water quantity affects salinity, which affects food webs and habitat; these linkages can be investigated with water-quality and food web monitoring. Water quantity also affects inundated habitat, which can be quantified through remote sensing. It is necessary to quantify hydroclimatic and water use controls on water availability to terminal lakes to assess the response of the ecosystems. Remotely sensed data can provide a broad-scale and long-term synoptic view of terminal lake hydrologic characteristics, but ground observations are required to interpret changes in water quality and ecological functions. Some terminal lake basins have ongoing monitoring and modeling efforts within the Great Basin (for example, Great Salt Lake, Carson River Basin), yet most monitoring locations are hydrologically upgradient and too far away from lake inflows to provide an accurate assessment of hydrological trends for the lake ecosystems. Other terminal lakes have no long-term hydrological monitoring in their respective watersheds (for example, Lake Abert). Ecological data collection in the Great Basin is also insufficient to understand how many birds exist on the landscape, how birds use the mosaic of terminal-lake habitats as an interconnected system, and how Great Basin terminal lakes are linked to the larger continental system of the Pacific and Central Flyways. Across agencies and organizations, tracking bird movement, abundance, and diversity is inconsistent, with some lakes having once- or twice-a-year bird survey efforts and a few locations having more intensive ecological data-gathering efforts (for example, Great Salt Lake, Lake Abert). Bridging hydrological and ecological information gaps will improve understanding of the trends in water supply and water quality, habitat availability and usage, and impacts on vulnerable waterbird species, all of which would be used by managers in coordinated conservation of this unique network of terminal-lake habitats. The terminal lakes of the Great Basin are part of the Basin and Range physiographic province that extends from the Colorado Plateau on the east to the Sierra Nevada on the west, and from the Snake River Plain on the north to the Garlock fault and the Mojave block on the south. The Great Basin is larger than 650,000 square kilometers and encompasses most of the State of Nevada but also extends to western Utah, eastern California, southeastern Idaho, southwestern Wyoming, and southeastern Oregon. The climate is arid to semiarid with a hydrologic regime that is snowmelt dominated, providing as much as 75 percent of total annual runoff for the region. Terminal lakes of the Great Basin occupy the lowest areas of closed (endorheic) drainage basins, such that lake levels and water quality respond rapidly to surface-water inflow. Terminal lakes provide local and regional economic value to the States in the Great Basin, including mineral extraction, aquaculture, public works, and recreational uses. As an example, assessments of Great Salt Lake’s ecological health and economic impact find hemispheric importance for the former and regional importance for the latter. Great Salt Lake creates about 7,000 jobs and $2 billion of economic output per year, most of which would be lost with further declines in lake level. The objectives of this Science Strategy are threefold: (1) to identify how changing water availability affects the quality, diversity, and abundance of habitats supporting continental waterbird populations; (2) to highlight the scientific monitoring and assessment needs of Great Basin terminal lakes; and (3) to support coordinated management and conservation actions to benefit those ecosystems, migratory birds, and other wildlife. There are long-term hydrological, ecological, and societal challenges associated with terminal lakes ecosystems in the Great Basin. This Science Strategy benefits partners by providing a conceptual model, nested at different spatial extents, that identifies key scientific information needs to inform coordinated implementation of management and conservation plans within and among hydrologic basins to address these complex challenges.

California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Wyoming↗
USGS2024

The U.S. Geological Survey Volcano Science Center’s response plan for significant volcanic events

This publication describes the U.S. Geological Survey Volcano Science Center (VSC) Response Plan for Significant Volcanic Events (hereinafter referred to as “the plan”) that has been developed for U.S volcano observatories over the past several years in consultation with the lead scientist, or Scientist-in-Charge (SIC), of each of the five U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) volcano observatories. The goal of the plan is to define a standardized management system that ensures the VSC can achieve the following during a volcanic crisis: maintain situational awareness and issue timely warnings and hazard assessments, fulfill internal and external agency requests for information as well as requests from the public, sustain financial and technical support, and gather critical scientific data. The plan addresses situations in which the scale of a response at least temporarily eclipses the response capabilities of a single observatory. The plan features two integrated response structures for managing and carrying out operations within the VSC during a crisis: the Observatory Volcanic Event Response Team (OVERT) and the Center Volcanic Event Response Team (CVERT). The design of these structures reflects lessons learned from past volcanic responses and is influenced by the Incident Command System used by the U.S. Federal Government for managing emergency responses. The plan clarifies expectations regarding the flow of information during a response, summarizes required tasks of the responding observatory and VSC to ensure a successful response, defines response-team roles and responsibilities, and describes the internal communication practices critical for an effective and coordinated response.

Circular↗
USGS2024

Integrated science for the study of microplastics in the environment—A strategic science vision for the U.S. Geological Survey

Executive Summary Evidence of the widespread occurrence of microplastics throughout our environment and exposure to humans and other organisms over the past decade has led to questions about the possibility of health hazards and mitigation of exposures. This document discusses nanoplastics as well as microplastics (referred to solely as microplastics); the microplastics have a range from 1 micrometer to 5 millimeters (1 μm–5 mm) in length, whereas the nanoplastics are less than 1 μm in length (sidebar ES1). A myriad of environmental exposure pathways with microplastics to humans and wildlife, including ingestion, inhalation, and bodily absorption, are likely to exist. A growing body of evidence has documented bioaccumulation of microplastics in tissues and organs of humans and wildlife, benthic community effects, and potential nutritional and reproductive effects in some wildlife species. Understanding if or when environmental exposures pose a health risk is complicated by the diversity of microplastic sizes, morphologies, polymer types, and chemicals added during manufacturing or sorbed from the environment; ongoing challenges in analytical methods used to detect, quantify, and characterize microplastics and associated chemicals in our ecosystems; and the fact that ecotoxicological studies regarding microplastics are still in their infancy. Therefore, the study of environmental exposures and potential related health hazards of microplastics to the public and wildlife is a One Health (sidebar ES2) research topic that necessitates integrated science approaches. A better understanding of the sources, pathways, fate, and biological effects of microplastics has become a priority of the Federal Government, State governments, Tribes, stakeholders, and the public. Examples of Federal and State microplasticfocused legislation and programs to prioritize microplastic research and reduction include the Federal Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015, California Senate Bills 1422 and 1263 (2018), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Trash Free Waters Program, the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s Microplastic and Nanoplastic Metrology project, and Minnesota’s microplastic project. With its unique expertise and capabilities, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is well positioned to help fill some of the most important microplastic science gaps. This strategic science vision document for microplastics identifies current (2023) microplastic science gaps and prioritizes research relevant to the mission, expertise, and capabilities of the USGS. It is intended for USGS scientists and stakeholders to use as a starting point for planning, prioritizing, and designing collaborative environmental microplastic science. Many of the microplastic science gaps and priorities are scalable, from local to national, and thus, can be made commensurate with available funding and evolving analytical and field tools, laboratory capacity, and stakeholder needs. Current (2023) or future research by academia and other Federal or State agencies, and Tribes may be aimed at some of the same microplastic science gaps identified in this document. Therefore, this document can be used as an information resource to maximize strengths and capabilities and minimize redundancy in communication and collaboration.

Circular↗
USGS2025

U.S. Geological Survey Pollinator Science Strategy, 2025–35—A Review and Look Forward

This “U.S. Geological Survey Pollinator Science Strategy, 2025–35—A Review and Look Forward” (“Pollinator Science Strategy”) describes the science vision of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to support management, conservation, and policy decisions on animal pollinators and their habitats. As the science arm of the Department of the Interior, the USGS has a primary role in providing scientific information to natural resource managers and policymakers across the United States. This “Pollinator Science Strategy” was drafted by a team of USGS pollinator researchers and was further developed through feedback from Federal, State, Tribal, nongovernmental organizations, and industry partners. This “Pollinator Science Strategy” highlights the USGS’s role in the research to promote healthy pollinator populations and address partner information gaps so they can make more informed management decisions. By outlining the importance of USGS science in addressing the information needs of other agencies, organizations, and the public, the “Pollinator Science Strategy” reaffirms the USGS’s commitment to pollinator research and showcases our research priorities for 2025–35. With more than 300 research centers nationally, the USGS is equipped to address pollinator science across scales of complexity and geographic range. USGS pollinator science is organized according to the following five thematic areas: Assessing species ecology, distributions, and natural history requirements. Tracking species status and trends. Understanding species threats and stressors. Informing restoration and management actions. Developing novel methods for improving pollinator research, monitoring, and population outcomes that can benefit our Nation. Our pollinator information products and associated data are made widely available to the public to ensure scientific transparency and accessibility. This “Pollinator Science Strategy” concludes with several research goals that the USGS will work towards from 2025 to 2035, representing our vision for USGS science. These research goals include synthesizing and modernizing the latest information on pollinator threats, developing research that assists managers with habitat design and restoration, providing training to partners on native bee identification and monitoring design, and developing new technologies for assessing the status and trends of our nation’s pollinators.

Circular↗
USGS2026

Artificial intelligence strategy for the U.S. Geological Survey

Artificial intelligence (AI) can offer opportunities to enhance the science, science delivery, and business operations of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Although USGS staff have proactively adopted AI into our workflows for many years, a comprehensive USGS strategy for AI has not previously been developed. The strategy described here is motivated by the acceleration of AI technological development, the benefits of increased AI adoption to USGS mission delivery as anticipated by USGS staff, rising public concern about the implications and trustworthiness of AI, and emerging Federal directives and guidance about AI. The USGS vision is to continue integrating AI to deliver valuable science for the public good while maintaining high ethical standards, scientific quality and integrity, and compliance with Federal and U.S. Department of the Interior requirements. To realize this vision, the USGS can take steps to (1) develop a strong AI workforce, (2) adapt our organizational approaches to include AI governance and communication, (3) ensure responsible and trustworthy use of AI, (4) modernize our computing and data infrastructure to support AI, and (5) accelerate AI adoption and innovation in the Bureau.

Circular↗
USGS1953

Water resources of the Minneapolis-St. Paul area, Minnesota

The water supply of the Minneapolis-St. Paul area is adequate to satisfy present requirements and requirements for many years to come if the area continues to develop at about the present rate. The flow of -the Mississippi River at the Twin Cities is more than sufficient to meet the demands of the water-supply systems of Minneapolis and St. Paul. The lowest momentary flow during the period 1931-51 was more than twice the present combined maximum demand of Minneapolis and St. Paul. The lake storage of the St. Paul system combined with possible regulations by the Mississippi River headwater reservoir system, in case of an emergency, provides a reserve supply ample to meet a greatly expanded demand. The lowest average daily flow of the Mississippi River at the intakes of the Minneapolis and St. Paul water supply was 389 mgd (602 cfs), The flow at the water supply intakes has been less than 452 mgd (700 cfs) for not more than 6 consecutive days. Except for the Mississippi River, the streams in the Twin Cities area have not been extensively developed for water supply. The only known use of them for water supply is for the steam-electric. generating plant on the Minnesota River at Savage. Thus, the St. Croix River, within 12 miles on the east, the Minnesota River entering the Twin Cities from the southwest, the Vermilion within 12 miles on the south, and the Crow River within 25 miles on the west offer untapped supplies for industrial and municipal uses. Many water-bearing formations occur in the area. A blanket of glacial deposits, as much as 400 feet thick, covers the area. Small domestic ground-water supplies can be developed practically everywhere in the glacial deposits, and larger industrial supplies can be obtained by exploring and testing. Below the glacial materials is a thick series of rock formations including several prolific sandstone aquifers. The formations dip toward the center of the area forming an artesian basin. The estimated average daily withdrawal of ground water from all aquifers in the area is about 90 mgd. Practically all the communities that are not supplied by the Minneapolis or St. Paul water-supply systems obtain their water from wells. Where many large-capacity wells have been concentrated in relatively small areas, there has been a great lowering of artesian pressures. However, there are large areas, distant from the centers of concentrated pumping, which are favorable for the development of additional ground water. With an adequate program of exploration and testing to determine precisely the geologic and hydrologic characteristics of the waterbearing formations, it is likely that large additional supplies of ground water can be developed for municipal and industrial uses. Both Minneapolis and St. Paul obtain their municipal water supplies from the Mississippi River above the TwinCities and are thus assured of a large supply that is not subject to contamination by industrial wastes and sewage effluents, Treatment at municipal plants for both cities provides water for diversified industrial use and for domestic use that meets U. S. Public Health Service drinking water standards., The treated water is remarkably uniform in chemical composition throughout the year and is virtually free of all color, iron, manganese, and turbidity. Currently, (1952). the two supplies are softened to about 75 ppm (as CaC03), which is an average reduction of about 55 percent in hardness of river water. The dissolvedsolids content of the treated water for St. Paul currently (1952) averages about 100 ppm; the dissolved-solids content of the Minneapolis water is slightly higher. As a matter of further interest to industrial consumers, temperatures of the untreated river water, which is only slightly altered at the Minneapolis treatment plant, averages less than 60 F for about 8 months of the year and is less than 40 F for 4 winter months. The Mississippi River as it enters the Twin Cities is moderately mineralized, averaging 241 ppm dissolved solids and 179 ppm hardness during the period 1940-49, Average turbidity is very low and silica is moderately low, but the quantities of iron and color in solution are relatively high. Color increases markedly during the period March to July in response to an increase in streamflow. The average chemical composition of the water has remained virtually unchanged except for seasonal variations since 1907. Data collected by the Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District have shown improved sanitary conditions of the river at the Twin Cities lock and dam since the sewage plant went into operation in 1939. The Minnesota River is more than twice as mineralized and hard as the Mississippi River, and it exerts a noticeable effect on the chemical and sanitary quality of the Mississippi River at St. Paul. Other principal tributary streams to the Mississippi River, including Crow River, Vermilion River, and Bassett Creek, were sampled during the 1952 flood season, at which time they were of the calcium-bicarbonate type, more dilute, and of lower hardness than the Minnesota River. Lake waters in the Twin Cities area generally are less mineralized than those of the streams. Waters from the drift deposits and bedrock formations overlying the Hinckley sandstone are hard and calcareous and generally contain troublesome quantities of iron. Regular treatment is required of some public-supply wells for removal of iron encrustations. Water fr.om these sources generally exceeds 300 ppm hardness, but in some places the St. Peter sandstone and St. Lawrence formation yield water of better quality. The Hinckley sandstone yields the best quality ground-water because of its comparatively lower hardness and uniform temperature (about 52 F). However, the average hardness of the treated municipal supplies of St. Paul and Minneapolis is considerably less than water from the Hinckley.

Minnesota↗
USGS1956

Water resources of the New Orleans area, Louisiana

Industry, commerce, and public utilities in 1954 withdrew about 1,500 mgd from surface- and groundwater sources in the New Orleans area. Most of the withdrawal was made from the Mississippi River. However, some withdrawal of surface water was made from Lake Pontchartrain. A large part of the withdrawal from both ground- and surface-water sources is available for reuse. Ground-water withdrawal amounts to about 100 mgd and is primarily for industrial and commercial uses. The average flow of the Mississippi River for the 23-year period, 1931--54, amounted to 309,000 mgd, and the approximate average flow of all the tributaries to Lake Pontchartrain is about 4,000 mgd. The flow of the Pearl River, which adjoins the tributary drainage area of Lake Pontchartrain, averages about 8,000 mgd. Total withdrawal of ground and surface waters amounts to less than 3 percent of the recorded minimum flow of the Mississippi River or less than 1 percent of the average flow. Although large quantities of water are always available in the Mississippi River the quality of the Water is not suitable for all uses. Streams from the north that drain into Lakes Maurepas and Pontchartrain, and the aquifers in that area, offer one of the best sources of fresh water in the State. Industry, if located on the northern shores of Lake Maurepas or Lake Pontchartrain near the mouths of these tributaries, would be assured of an ample supply of either ground or surface water of excellent quality. All the tributaries north of Lake Pontchartrain have dry-weather flows which are dependable. The Pearl River above Bogalusa also is a good source of fresh water of excellent quality. At present it serves to dilute the tidal flow of salt water into Lake Pontchartrain through the Rigolets, the principal outlet of the lake. In the area north of Lake Pontchartrain, wells 60 to 2,000 feet deep yield fresh water. There are no known wells tapping sands below 2,000 feet. However, electrical logs of. oil-test wells show that fresh water is available to a maximum depth of 3,000 feet. In the area south of Lake Pontchartrain, there is no withdrawal of ground water for public water supplies because of the saline content of the water. Three principal water-bearing sands, the '200-foot, ' '400-foot, ' and '700-foot'sands, are tapped in the New Orleans area south of Lake Pontchartrain for industrial and commercial use. In this area all deeper sands yield salt water. In some areas the '200-foot' sand contains saline water of the sodium chloride type. Consequently, this sand is not developed extensively. Water from the 200-foot' sand is relatively fresh north of the Mississippi River and becomes increasingly saline to the south and west. The 400-foot' sand is the second most highly developed aquifer in the New Orleans industrial district. The aquifer appears to be very prolific, but its full capabilities have not yet been determined. This aquifer yields a highly mineralized sodium chloride water in some areas; however, elsewhere it is a source of large quantities of fresh water. The '700-foot' sand is the most continuous freshwater bearing sand in the area and is the principal source of fresh ground water in the New Orleans industrial district. Most of the wells tapping this aquifer yield soft water of the bicarbonate type. In the southern and western parts of the industrial district the water in the '700-foot' sand is too mineralized to be suitable for human consumption.

Circular↗
USGS1957

Estimated use of water in the United States, 1955

The estimated withdrawal use of water in the United States during 1955 was about 740,000 mgd (million gallons per day). Withdrawal use of water requires that it be removed from the ground or diverted from a stream or lake. In this report it is divided into five types: public supplies, rural, irrigation, self-supplied industrial, and waterpower. Consumptive use of water is the quantity discharged to the atmosphere or incorporated in the products of the process in which it was used. Only a small part of the water withdrawn for industry was consumed, but as much as 60 percent of the water withdrawn for irrigation may have been consumed. Of the water withdrawn in 1955 about 1,500,000 mgd was for generation of waterpower, and all other withdrawal uses amounted to only about 240,000 mgd. Surface-water sources supplied 194,000 mgd and groundwater sources supplied 46,000 mgd. The amount of water withdrawn in each State and in each of 19 geographic regions is given. The quantity of water used without being withdrawn for such purposes as navigation, recreation, and conservation of fish and wildlife was not determined. The water surface area of the reservoirs and lakes used to store water for these purposes is sufficiently large that the evaporation from this source is greater than the quantity of water withdrawn for rural and public supplies. The amount of water used for generation of waterpower has increased 36 percent since 1950. The largest increase, 43 percent, was in self-supplied industrial water. Rural use, excluding irrigation, decreased 31 percent. The upper limit of our water supply is the average annual runoff, nearly 1,200, 000 mgd. The supply is depleted by the quantity of water consumed rather than by the quantity withdrawn. In 1955 about one-fourth of the water withdrawn was consumed. The amount thus consumed is about one-twentieth of the supply.

Circular↗