USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Science Activities”

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 19 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2010

Utah Science Activities, Update 2010

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), a bureau of the U.S. Department of the Interior, serves the Nation by providing reliable scientific information to describe and understand the Earth; minimize loss of life and property from natural disasters; manage water, biological, energy, and mineral resources; and enhance and protect our quality of life. The USGS has become a world leader in the natural sciences thanks to our scientific excellence and responsiveness to society's needs. This newsletter describes some of the current and recently completed USGS earth-science activities in Utah. As an unbiased, multi-disciplinary science organization that focuses on biology, geography, geology, and water, we are dedicated to the timely, relevant, and impartial study of the landscape, our natural resources, and the natural hazards that threaten us. Learn more about our goals and priorities for the coming decade in the USGS Science Strategy at http://www.usgs.gov/science_strategy/ .

General Information Product↗
USGS2016

Climate Change Science Activities of the U.S. Geological Survey in New England

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has actively pursued research in the effects of climate change on the hydrology of New England. Ongoing focus areas of climate change science activities of the USGS in New England include the following: • Hydrologic climate-response data (initiating or expanding long-term hydrologic climate-response data collection networks to detect and monitor climate-related changes in hydrology) • Relations between historical climatic and hydrologic variation (investigating historic relations between long-term climatic variation and hydrologic variation and connecting these relations to future conditions as forecasted by the Interagency Panel on Climate Change (Nakićenović and others, 2000) • Hydrologic change on natural and human (incorporating climate change scenarios into assessments of how flows in streams or water levels in aquifers may change) • Relations between climatic and hydrologic variation (characterizing impacts of climate change on floods and droughts, the long-term availability of water supplies for societal and natural uses in response to climate changes) • Developing tools to forecast ecosystem change and water resources management (developing regionally consistent tools for forecasting ecosystem change and resource management) This fact sheet presents recent climate change investigations of the USGS in New England using selected recent publications. These publications highlight the broad spectrum of expertise and commitment to understanding the relations of climate change and water resources in New England.

New England↗
USGS2018

An overview of USGS-NASA Landsat Science activities during 2018

Two meetings of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)-NASA Landsat Science Team (LST) took place in 2018. The USGS Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center hosted the winter meeting, which took place February 21-22 in Sioux Falls, SD. The University of Colorado-Boulder hosted the summer meeting, which was held August 8-10 in Boulder, CO.

The Earth Observer↗
USGS2016

Groundwater contaminant science activities of the U.S. Geological Survey in New England

Aquifers in New England provide water for human needs and natural ecosystems. In some areas, however, aquifers have been degraded by contaminants from geologic and human sources. In recent decades, the U.S. Geological Survey has been a leader in describing contaminant occurrence in the bedrock and surficial aquifers of New England. In cooperation with Federal, State, and local agencies, the U.S. Geological Survey has also studied the vulnerability of groundwater to contaminants, the factors affecting the geographic distribution of contaminants, and the geochemical processes controlling contaminant transport and fate. This fact sheet describes some of the major science needs in the region related to groundwater contaminants and highlights recent U.S. Geological Survey studies that provide a foundation for future investigations.

New England↗
USGS2013

Summary of science, activities, programs, and policies that influence the rangewide conservation of Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus)

The Greater Sage-Grouse, has been observed, hunted, and counted for decades. The sagebrush biome, home to the Greater Sage-Grouse, includes sagebrush-steppe and Great Basin sagebrush communities, interspersed with grasslands, salt flats, badlands, mountain ranges, springs, intermittent creeks and washes, and major river systems, and is one of the most widespread and enigmatic components of Western U.S. landscapes. Over time, habitat conversion, degradation, and fragmentation have accumulated across the entire range such that local conditions as well as habitat distributions at local and regional scales are negatively affecting the long-term persistence of this species. Historic patterns of human use and settlement of the sagebrush ecosystem have contributed to the current condition and status of sage-grouse populations. The accumulation of habitat loss, persistent habitat degradation, and fragmentation by industry and urban infrastructure, as indicated by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) findings, presents a significant challenge for conservation of this species and sustainable management of the sagebrush ecosystem. Because of the wide variations in natural and human history across these landscapes, no single prescription for management of sagebrush ecosystems (including sage-grouse habitats) will suffice to guide the collective efforts of public and private entities to conserve the species and its habitat. This report documents and summarizes several decades of work on sage-grouse populations, sagebrush as habitat, and sagebrush community and ecosystem functions based on the recent assessment and findings of the USFWS under consideration of the Endangered Species Act. As reflected here, some of these topics receive a greater depth of discussion because of the perceived importance of the issue for sagebrush ecosystems and sage-grouse populations. Drawing connections between the direct effects on sagebrush ecosystems and the effect of ecosystem condition on habitat condition, and finally the connection between habitat quality and sage-grouse population dynamics remains an important goal for science, management, and conservation. This effort is necessary, despite the perception that these complicated, indirect relations are difficult to characterize and manage, and the many advances in understanding and application developed toward this end have been documented here to help inform regional planning and policy decisions.

Arizona;California;Colorado;Montana;Nebraska;Nevad↗
USGS2008

Science Activities Associated with Proposed 2008 High-Flow Experiment at Glen Canyon Dam

Grand Canyon National Park lies approximately 15 miles downriver from Glen Canyon Dam, which was built on the Colorado River just south of the Arizona-Utah border. Because the dam stops most sediment moving downstream, its presence has resulted in erosion and shrinkage of river sandbars in Grand Canyon. Fewer and smaller sandbars mean smaller camping beaches for visitors to use, continued erosion of cultural sites, and possibly less habitat for native fish, including the endangered humpback chub. In an effort to restore sandbars and related habitat and to comply with its responsibilities under the Grand Canyon Protection Act, the Department of the Interior has proposed a high-flow release of water from Glen Canyon Dam in March 2008. The U.S. Geological Survey?s (USGS) Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center is responsible for coordinating research associated with the proposed experiment. The proposed studies are designed to evaluate the feasibility of using such high flows to improve a range of Grand Canyon resources.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2025

USGS Environmental Health Program—Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) science activities [postcard]

Introduction The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Environmental Health Program conducts various activities related to PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) to understand their impacts on human health and the environment. Through these activities, the program aims to provide critical information and resources to address the challenges posed by PFAS contamination.

General Information Product↗
USGS2025

Four-band image mosaic of the Colorado River Corridor downstream of Glen Canyon Dam in Arizona, derived from the May 2021 airborne image acquisition

In May 2021, the U.S. Geological Survey’s Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center acquired airborne multispectral high-resolution data for the Colorado River in the Grand Canyon, Arizona. The image data, which consist of four spectral bands (red, band 1; green, band 2; blue, band 3; and near infrared, band 4) with a ground resolution of 20 centimeters, are available as 16-bit unsigned-integer GeoTIFF files in Sankey and others (2024) (available online at https://doi.org/10.5066/P9BBGN6G ). The image files are projected in the State Plane Coordinate System, using the central Arizona zone (202) with the North American Datum of 1983 National Adjustment of 2011. The assessed spatial accuracy for these data is based on 47 ground-control points that were independent from the ground-control points used by the contractor for aerotriangulation and is reported at the 95-percent confidence level as 0.514 meter (m) and a root mean square error of 0.297 m. The intended uses of this dataset are primarily in support of scientific research and monitoring applications. Examples of these applications include high-resolution spatial and temporal change detection of the river channel, geomorphic landforms, riparian vegetation, and backwater and nearshore habitat, as well as other ecosystem-wide mapping. These imagery data also serve as reference material for field science mission planning, as base data for field data collection including community science activities, and as a highly detailed guide for technical boat operation during science activities such as reconnaissance for nighttime missions and navigating rapids during low flows.

Arizona, Nevada, Utah↗
USGS2023

Coordinating science during an eruption: Lessons from the 2020–2021 Kīlauea volcanic eruption

Data collected during well-observed eruptions can lead to dramatic increases in our understanding of volcanic processes. However, the necessary prioritization of public safety and hazard mitigation during a crisis means that scientific opportunities may be sacrificed. Thus, maximizing the scientific gains from eruptions requires improved planning and coordinating science activities among governmental organizations and academia before and during volcanic eruptions. One tool to facilitate this coordination is a Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC). In the USA, the Community Network for Volcanic Eruption Response (CONVERSE) has been developing and testing this concept during workshops and scenario-based activities. The December 2020 eruption of Kīlauea volcano, Hawaii, provided an opportunity to test and refine this model in real-time and in a real-world setting. We present here the working model of a SAC developed during this eruption. Successes of the Kīlauea SAC (K-SAC) included broadening the pool of scientists involved in eruption response and developing and codifying procedures that may form the basis of operation for future SACs. Challenges encountered by the K-SAC included a process of review and facilitation of research proposals that was too slow to include outside participation in the early parts of the eruption and a decision process that fell on a small number of individuals at the responding volcano observatory. Possible ways to address these challenges include (1) supporting community-building activities between eruptions that make connections among scientists within and outside formal observatories, (2) identifying key science questions and pre-planning science activities, which would facilitate more rapid implementation across a broader scientific group, and (3) continued dialog among observatory scientists, emergency responders, and non-observatory scientists about the role of SACs. The SAC model holds promise to become an integral part of future efforts, leading in the short and longer term to more effective hazard response and greater scientific discovery and understanding.

Hawaii↗
USGS2011

The U.S. Geological Survey cartographic and geographic information science research activities 2006-2010

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) produces geospatial databases and topographic maps for the United States of America. A part of that mission includes conducting research in geographic information science (GIScience) and cartography to support mapping and improve the design, quality, delivery, and use of geospatial data and topographic maps. The Center of Excellence for Geospatial Information Science (CEGIS) was established by the USGS in January 2006 as a part of the National Geospatial Program Office. CEGIS (http://cegis.usgs.gov) evolved from a team of cartographic researchers at the Mid-Continent Mapping Center. The team became known as the Cartographic Research group and was supported by the Cooperative Topographic Mapping, Geographic Analysis and Monitoring, and Land Remote Sensing programs of the Geography Discipline of the USGS from 1999-2005. In 2006, the Cartographic Research group and its projects (http://carto-research.er.usgs.gov/) became the core of CEGIS staff and research. In 2006, CEGIS research became focused on The National Map (http://nationalmap.gov).

Cartography and Geographic Information Science↗
USGS2014

Standardized phenology monitoring methods to track plant and animal activity for science and resource management applications

Phenology offers critical insights into the responses of species to climate change; shifts in species’ phenologies can result in disruptions to the ecosystem processes and services upon which human livelihood depends. To better detect such shifts, scientists need long-term phenological records covering many taxa and across a broad geographic distribution. To date, phenological observation efforts across the USA have been geographically limited and have used different methods, making comparisons across sites and species difficult. To facilitate coordinated cross-site, cross-species, and geographically extensive phenological monitoring across the nation, the USA National Phenology Network has developed in situ monitoring protocols standardized across taxonomic groups and ecosystem types for terrestrial, freshwater, and marine plant and animal taxa. The protocols include elements that allow enhanced detection and description of phenological responses, including assessment of phenological “status”, or the ability to track presence–absence of a particular phenophase, as well as standards for documenting the degree to which phenological activity is expressed in terms of intensity or abundance. Data collected by this method can be integrated with historical phenology data sets, enabling the development of databases for spatial and temporal assessment of changes in status and trends of disparate organisms. To build a common, spatially, and temporally extensive multi-taxa phenological data set available for a variety of research and science applications, we encourage scientists, resources managers, and others conducting ecological monitoring or research to consider utilization of these standardized protocols for tracking the seasonal activity of plants and animals.

International Journal of Biometeorology↗
USGS2026

Arizona Water Science Center activities at Lees Ferry, Arizona

Introduction In 1921, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) established a streamgage on the Colorado River at Lees Ferry, Arizona, to monitor the river’s flow and level as it enters Grand Canyon. The following year, the seven States encompassing the Colorado River Basin (Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming) negotiated the 1922 Colorado River Compact to regulate distribution of the river’s waters between them. The compact divided the basin into two regions—the Upper Basin and the Lower Basin—and established the dividing point between them about one mile downstream from Lees Ferry, just below the confluence of the Colorado and Paria Rivers. The Colorado River at Lees Ferry streamgage (USGS station 09380000) is one of the most important streamgages in the United States because it is used to measure how much water passes from the Upper Basin to the Lower Basin through Glen Canyon Dam. The dam, constructed between 1956 and 1966, generates hydropower and stores water in Lake Powell reservoir, which is used to provide Upper and Lower Basin states with the water allotted to them by the compact. Lower Basin states depend on releases from the dam to receive their allotments. The Lees Ferry streamgage, located less than 16 miles downstream from Glen Canyon Dam, produces publicly available, real-time water data that allows the Colorado River’s streamflow below the dam to be monitored. Most years, the Colorado River runs dry before reaching its historical terminus at the Gulf of California in Mexico, so measuring and monitoring the river at Lees Ferry is critical for the Lower Basin ecosystems, agricultural resources, and municipal industries that rely on the river’s every drop. Additionally, Grand Canyon river guides and recreationalists depend on water level data from the Lees Ferry streamgage to determine when to run rapids and camp on sandbars. Streamflow and water-quality data collected at Lees Ferry are also important for monitoring the health of the Colorado River’s aquatic life because some species, including fish and macroinvertebrates, require certain water conditions to survive, reproduce, and spawn. The Arizona Water Science Center is responsible for maintaining and collecting water data from the Lees Ferry streamgage. The Arizona Water Science Center is a branch of the USGS dedicated to providing high quality, impartial water data to resource managers and the public for their use in understanding and managing critical water resources in Arizona and the Southwest.

Arizona↗
USGS2005

Geography for a Changing World - A science strategy for the geographic research of the U.S. Geological Survey, 2005-2015

This report presents a science strategy for the geographic research of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the years 2005-2015. The common thread running through the vision, mission, and science goals presented in the plan is that USGS geographers will provide national leadership to understand coupled human-environmental systems in the face of land change and will deliver pertinent information to decisionmakers on the vulnerability and resilience of these systems. We define land change science as the study of the human and environment dynamics that give rise to changed land use, cover, and surface form. A number of realities shape the strategic context of this plan: The Department of Interior Strategic Plan focuses on meeting society’s resource needs and sustaining the Nation’s life support systems, underscoring the importance of characterizing and understanding coupled human-environmental systems. In redefining its mission in the mid-1990s, the USGS envisions itself as an integrated natural science and information agency. The USGS will assume a national leadership role in the use of science to develop knowledge about the web of relations that couple biophysical and human systems and translate this knowledge into unbiased, reliable information that meets important societal information needs. The following trends will influence USGS geography-oriented science activities over the next decade. Most of the emerging earth science issues that the USGS will address are geographic phenomena. A growing international concern for aligning society’s development activities with environmental limits has led to an articulation of a science agenda associated with global environmental change, vulnerability, and resilience. Earth science investigations have evolved toward the study of very large areas, and the resulting huge volumes of data are challenging to manage and understand. Finally, scientists and the public face the challenge of gaining intelligent insights about geographic and environmental processes from these data, with the ultimate goal of guiding resource-management decisions. The first four science goals in the plan support understanding the human and environmental dynamics of land change. Each science goal has an associated set of strategic actions to achieve the goal. These goals and actions are consistent with national science priorities and the Department of Interior and USGS missions, take advantage of existing expertise, and lead to the strengthening of critical geographic research capacities that do not exist in other USGS disciplines.

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↗
USGS2021

Integrated science for the study of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in the environment—A strategic science vision for the U.S. Geological Survey

Concerns related to perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in sources of drinking water and in natural and engineered environments have captured national attention over the last few decades. This report provides an overview of the science gaps that exist in the fields of study related to PFAS that are relevant to the U.S. Geological Survey mission and identifies opportunities where the U.S. Geological Survey can help address these gaps on the basis of the agency’s capabilities and expertise. The integrated science activities envisioned in this document can be designed to address science needs at local, regional, and national scales and varying timeframes as stakeholders are engaged and their needs evolve. This document is intended as an information resource for U.S. Geological Survey scientists who are prioritizing and planning research related to PFAS and may be useful for developing partnerships and collaborations with other scientists, agencies, and stakeholders.

Circular↗
USGS2022

Use case development for earth monitoring, analysis, and prediction (EarthMAP)—A road map for future integrated predictive science at the U.S. Geological Survey

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 21st-century science strategy 2020–30 promotes a bureau-wide strategy to develop and deliver an integrated, predictive science capability that works at the scales and timelines needed to inform societally relevant resource management and protection and public safety and environmental health decisions (U.S. Geological Survey, 2021). This is the overarching goal of the USGS Earth Monitoring, Analysis, and Prediction (EarthMAP) vision, which consists of three components: (1) integrated data and information, (2) integrated predictive science, and (3) actionable information—all designed and delivered to respond to user needs. To launch this vision and help shape the design and implementation of integrated predictive science, the USGS Regional Offices each developed a set of use cases (hereafter Use Cases)—short descriptions of potential science applications that could clearly address high priority decision-making needs of our stakeholders and that align with an integrated science focus. Use Cases are not actionable science planning documents, nor stand-alone scholarly works, but should be considered as innovative, next-generation science ideas that can be considered as potential components of science plans still under development. The goal of Use Case development was to (1) identify and characterize existing USGS scientific capacities and expertise that can support science goals and products, (2) identify opportunities to leverage current capacities for next-generation science, and (3) foster engagement across the entire Bureau to further refine the USGS strategy for EarthMAP and integrated predictive science. The Use Case development effort documented in this report was coordinated by the Use Case Development Team (UCDT), consisting of representatives from each region. The UCDT undertook five tasks: (1) develop a unified approach to engage bureau scientists consistently across all regions in aspirational thinking about what can be accomplished; (2) work with the regions and their Science Centers to generate an initial set of Use Cases, authored directly by scientists; (3) characterize, summarize, and document the initial set of Use Case submissions from authors to illuminate bureau-level demand for integrated science; (4) compare existing and needed capacities from the Use Case descriptions with preliminary results of the EarthMAP Capacity Assessment (Keisman and others, 2021); and (5) describe lessons learned from the Use Case development process and provide recommendations to inform future efforts to generate integrated science activities. This report outlines the approach the UCDT developed to solicit Use Cases from the regions and summarizes the high-level qualitative findings from this first-round effort. The UCDT received 36 Use Cases from the regions and identified potential points of convergence and commonalities considered useful in making connections among the participating scientists. The Southwest (SW) Region and the Rocky Mountain (RM) Region asked scientists to give special consideration to Use Cases with applicability to the Colorado River Basin, and seven of the Use Cases specifically named that geographic area as a focus. Coastal hazards and coastal resilience were identified in Use Cases from the Alaska (AK), Northeast (NE), and Southeast (SE) Regions. Aspects of wildfire and post-wildfire response were part of Uses Cases from AK, RM, and SW Regions. The greatest convergence of Use Case themes was related to conservation of public lands and waters, which is a powerful linkage lending strength to future collaborative efforts. The most common type of stakeholder decisions that would be informed by the Use Case science applications were related to adaptation, mitigation, and response (for example, how to increase the resilience of coastal communities to climate-related stressors and how to prevent or respond to harmful algal blooms). Other common types of decisions included water and land management decisions (including operational water management decisions such as reservoir operations and land use planning in the sagebrush biome), decisions about how to manage and conserve habitats and species, and risk management decisions (such as managing the post-wildfire flood risks). These decision types are not exclusive because many Use Cases cross categories. Use Case authors identified existing and needed science and technology capabilities required for Use Case implementation, which were then aligned to capabilities assessed in the EarthMAP Capacity Assessment (Keisman and others, 2021). Strong alignment was found for data and information integration approaches, modeling and prediction approaches, and capabilities related to delivery of actionable information. A majority of Use Cases indicated insufficient current capacity for needed data collection methods, data integration, and modeling and prediction approaches, whereas only 25 percent indicated insufficient capacity for actionable information delivery. Overall, many Use Case capacity demand gaps could potentially be met by existing bureau-wide capacity. In addition, nearly half of the Use Cases could potentially be implemented within 3 years if funding, capabilities, and personnel impediments were removed and science priorities were realigned. Several challenges emerged during the Use Case development process. The first challenge was developing an approach that was flexible enough to accommodate regional differences in planning and implementation, while also ensuring enough guidance to promote meaningful summary analyses. The UCDT encountered a strong demand for continuous communication and education to improve overall understanding of the integrated predictive science strategy. Another challenge was managing expectations about EarthMAP activities as a design effort that was not aligned to an immediate funding opportunity. Connecting the Use Cases to stakeholder needs without the opportunity for direct stakeholder engagement was also challenging. The last notable challenge was in obtaining consistent interpretation and characterization of the qualitative data housed in the narrative descriptions of Use Cases, written in different styles. Overall, the 36 Use Cases can serve as components of a road map for advancing integrated monitoring and predictive science throughout the USGS by revealing opportunities to (1) encourage cross-region initiatives that address shared interests in common themes by integrating similar Use Cases and through direct involvement of stakeholders in identifying needs and designing effective responses, (2) leverage the Use Cases to target investments that are aligned with the Bureau and Department of the Interior (DOI) priorities, (3) connect Use Cases and the results of the companion EarthMAP Capacity Assessment (Keisman and others, 2021) to identify potential priorities for capacity building investments, and (4) raise awareness of common integrated and interdisciplinary science interests within and across the regions through Use Case and Capacity Assessment summary outreach activities.

Open-File Report↗