SEARCH · USGS Science
Results for “Nature Conservancy News”
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.
Masked mustelid
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Review of the work of W. J. McGee on ground‐water levels
W J McGee was a scientist of broad‐interests, large vision, and unbounded enthusiasm for science and its application to human welfare. He was one of the earliest champions of the conservation of our natural resources. He rose from humble origin, by rigorous self‐discipline, to outstanding national leadership. He was absorbed by zeal for service to mankind. His life had a heroic quality, as is well portrayed in the sympathetic and interesting memoir by F. H. Knowlton (Geol. Soc Amer. Bull., v. 24, pp. 18–29, 1913).
Integrating the resist–accept–direct framework into natural resource decision-making processes for climate adaptation
The resist–accept–direct (RAD) framework for climate adaptation is a useful tool, particularly when conservation practitioners know they need to address climate change but do not know where to start or when they struggle to implement conservation actions that are outside the status quo. Some conservation practitioners may view RAD as a decision process that will lead them through selecting climate adaptation actions to meet their objectives; however, RAD may be better suited for use with existing decision processes. RAD can improve adaptation planning processes by helping conservation practitioners examine a broader portfolio of climate adaptation actions. Choosing the actions that meet organizational objectives and long-term goals relies on a sound decision process through which to select RAD-generated actions to implement across space and time. The good news for conservation practitioners is that RAD can easily be integrated into the decision processes they are already using—that is, a new decision process for RAD is not necessary. We examined 6 commonly used decision frameworks in the context of RAD for climate adaptation: structured decision-making, adaptive management, conservation standards, climate-smart conservation, strategic habitat conservation, and scenario planning. Each decision framework can easily incorporate RAD methodologies to create climate adaptation menus and portfolios within existing structures, allowing conservation practitioners to continue to utilize existing frameworks for their valuable decision-making tools. Integrating the RAD framework can enhance them by explicitly considering future uncertainties and providing a menu of climate adaptation actions for navigating changing ecosystems.