Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

Darius J. Semmens

Publications and source records attributed to Darius J. Semmens.

71 records · Page 4Linked to original sources
USGS2013

A framework for quantitative assessment of impacts related to energy and mineral resource development

Natural resource planning at all scales demands methods for assessing the impacts of resource development and use, and in particular it requires standardized methods that yield robust and unbiased results. Building from existing probabilistic methods for assessing the volumes of energy and mineral resources, we provide an algorithm for consistent, reproducible, quantitative assessment of resource development impacts. The approach combines probabilistic input data with Monte Carlo statistical methods to determine probabilistic outputs that convey the uncertainties inherent in the data. For example, one can utilize our algorithm to combine data from a natural gas resource assessment with maps of sage grouse leks and piñon-juniper woodlands in the same area to estimate possible future habitat impacts due to possible future gas development. As another example: one could combine geochemical data and maps of lynx habitat with data from a mineral deposit assessment in the same area to determine possible future mining impacts on water resources and lynx habitat. The approach can be applied to a broad range of positive and negative resource development impacts, such as water quantity or quality, economic benefits, or air quality, limited only by the availability of necessary input data and quantified relationships among geologic resources, development alternatives, and impacts. The framework enables quantitative evaluation of the trade-offs inherent in resource management decision-making, including cumulative impacts, to address societal concerns and policy aspects of resource development.

Natural Resources Research↗
USGS2013

A comparative assessment of tools for ecosystem services quantification and valuation

To enter widespread use, ecosystem service assessments need to be quantifiable, replicable, credible, flexible, and affordable. With recent growth in the field of ecosystem services, a variety of decision-support tools has emerged to support more systematic ecosystem services assessment. Despite the growing complexity of the tool landscape, thorough reviews of tools for identifying, assessing, modeling and in some cases monetarily valuing ecosystem services have generally been lacking. In this study, we describe 17 ecosystem services tools and rate their performance against eight evaluative criteria that gauge their readiness for widespread application in public- and private-sector decision making. We describe each of the tools′ intended uses, services modeled, analytical approaches, data requirements, and outputs, as well time requirements to run seven tools in a first comparative concurrent application of multiple tools to a common location – the San Pedro River watershed in southeast Arizona, USA, and northern Sonora, Mexico. Based on this work, we offer conclusions about these tools′ current ‘readiness’ for widespread application within both public- and private-sector decision making processes. Finally, we describe potential pathways forward to reduce the resource requirements for running ecosystem services models, which are essential to facilitate their more widespread use in environmental decision making.

Ecosystem Services↗
USGS2013

Comparing approaches to spatially explicit ecosystem service modeling: a case study from the San Pedro River, Arizona

Although the number of ecosystem service modeling tools has grown in recent years, quantitative comparative studies of these tools have been lacking. In this study, we applied two leading open-source, spatially explicit ecosystem services modeling tools – Artificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services (ARIES) and Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs (InVEST) – to the San Pedro River watershed in southeast Arizona, USA, and northern Sonora, Mexico. We modeled locally important services that both modeling systems could address – carbon, water, and scenic viewsheds. We then applied managerially relevant scenarios for urban growth and mesquite management to quantify ecosystem service changes. InVEST and ARIES use different modeling approaches and ecosystem services metrics; for carbon, metrics were more similar and results were more easily comparable than for viewsheds or water. However, findings demonstrate similar gains and losses of ecosystem services and conclusions when comparing effects across our scenarios. Results were more closely aligned for landscape-scale urban-growth scenarios and more divergent for a site-scale mesquite-management scenario. Follow-up studies, including testing in different geographic contexts, can improve our understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of these and other ecosystem services modeling tools as they move closer to readiness for supporting day-to-day resource management.

Arizona;Sonora↗
USGS2013

Climate change's impact on key ecosystem services and the human well-being they support in the US

Climate change alters the functions of ecological systems. As a result, the provision of ecosystem services and the well-being of people that rely on these services are being modified. Climate models portend continued warming and more frequent extreme weather events across the US. Such weather-related disturbances will place a premium on the ecosystem services that people rely on. We discuss some of the observed and anticipated impacts of climate change on ecosystem service provision and livelihoods in the US. We also highlight promising adaptive measures. The challenge will be choosing which adaptive strategies to implement, given limited resources and time. We suggest using dynamic balance sheets or accounts of natural capital and natural assets to prioritize and evaluate national and regional adaptation strategies that involve ecosystem services.

Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment↗
USGS2013

How do migratory species add ecosystem service value to wilderness? Calculating the spatial subsidies provided by protected areas

Species that migrate through protected and wilderness areas and utilize their resources, deliver ecosystem services to people in faraway locations. The mismatch between the areas that most support a species and those areas where the species provides most benefits to society can lead to underestimation of the true value of protected areas such as wilderness. We present a method to communicate the “off-site” value of wilderness and protected areas in providing habitat to migratory species that, in turn, provide benefits to people in distant locations. Using northern pintail ducks (Anas acuta) as an example, the article provides a method to estimate the amount of subsidy – the value of the ecosystem services provided by a migratory species in one area versus the cost to support the species and its habitat elsewhere.

International Journal of Wilderness↗
USGS2012

KINEROS2/AGWA: Model use, calibration and validation

KINEROS (KINematic runoff and EROSion) originated in the 1960s as a distributed event-based model that conceptualizes a watershed as a cascade of overland flow model elements that flow into trapezoidal channel model elements. KINEROS was one of the first widely available watershed models that interactively coupled a finite difference approximation of the kinematic overland flow equations to a physically based infiltration model. Development and improvement of KINEROS continued from the 1960s on a variety of projects for a range of purposes, which has resulted in a suite of KINEROS-based modeling tools. This article focuses on KINEROS2 (K2), a spatially distributed, event-based watershed rainfall-runoff and erosion model, and the companion ArcGIS-based Automated Geospatial Watershed Assessment (AGWA) tool. AGWA automates the time-consuming tasks of watershed delineation into distributed model elements and initial parameterization of these elements using commonly available, national GIS data layers. A variety of approaches have been used to calibrate and validate K2 successfully across a relatively broad range of applications (e.g., urbanization, pre- and post-fire, hillslope erosion, erosion from roads, runoff and recharge, and manure transport). The case studies presented in this article (1) compare lumped to stepwise calibration and validation of runoff and sediment at plot, hillslope, and small watershed scales; and (2) demonstrate an uncalibrated application to address relative change in watershed response to wildfire.

Transactions of the ASABE↗
USGS2012

Social values for ecosystem services (SolVES): Documentation and user manual, version 2.0

In response to the need for incorporating quantified and spatially explicit measures of social values into ecosystem services assessments, the Rocky Mountain Geographic Science Center (RMGSC), in collaboration with Colorado State University, developed a geographic information system (GIS) application, Social Values for Ecosystem Services (SolVES). With version 2.0 (SolVES 2.0), RMGSC has improved and extended the functionality of SolVES, which was designed to assess, map, and quantify the perceived social values of ecosystem services. Social values such as aesthetics, biodiversity, and recreation can be evaluated for various stakeholder groups as distinguished by their attitudes and preferences regarding public uses, such as motorized recreation and logging. As with the previous version, SolVES 2.0 derives a quantitative, 10-point, social-values metric, the Value Index, from a combination of spatial and nonspatial responses to public attitude and preference surveys and calculates metrics characterizing the underlying environment, such as average distance to water and dominant landcover. Additionally, SolVES 2.0 integrates Maxent maximum entropy modeling software to generate more complete social value maps and to produce robust statistical models describing the relationship between the social values maps and explanatory environmental variables. The performance of these models can be evaluated for a primary study area, as well as for similar areas where primary survey data are not available but where social value mapping could potentially be completed using value-transfer methodology. SolVES 2.0 also introduces the flexibility for users to define their own social values and public uses, model any number and type of environmental variable, and modify the spatial resolution of analysis. With these enhancements, SolVES 2.0 provides an improved public domain tool for decisionmakers and researchers to evaluate the social values of ecosystem services and to facilitate discussions among diverse stakeholders regarding the tradeoffs among different ecosystem services in a variety of physical and social contexts ranging from forest and rangeland to coastal and marine.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2012

Ecosystem services valuation to support decisionmaking on public lands—A case study of the San Pedro River watershed, Arizona

This report details the findings of the Bureau of Land Management–U.S. Geological Survey Ecosystem Services Valuation Pilot Study. This project evaluated alternative methods and tools that quantify and value ecosystem services, and it assessed the tools’ readiness for use in the Bureau of Land Management decisionmaking process. We tested these tools on the San Pedro River watershed in northern Sonora, Mexico, and southeast Arizona. The study area includes the San Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area (managed by the Bureau of Land Management), which has been a focal point for conservation activities and scientific research in recent decades. We applied past site-specific primary valuation studies, value transfer, the Wildlife Habitat Benefits Estimation Toolkit, and the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs (InVEST) and Artificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services (ARIES) models to value locally important ecosystem services for the San Pedro River watershed—water, carbon, biodiversity, and cultural values. We tested these approaches on a series of scenarios to evaluate ecosystem service changes and the ability of the tools to accommodate scenarios. A suite of additional tools were either at too early a stage of development to run, were proprietary, or were place-specific tools inappropriate for application to the San Pedro River watershed. We described the strengths and weaknesses of these additional ecosystem service tools against a series of evaluative criteria related to their usefulness for Bureau of Land Management decisionmaking. Using these tools, we quantified gains or losses of ecosystem services under three categories of scenarios: urban growth, mesquite management, and water augmentation. These results quantify tradeoffs and could be useful for decisionmaking within Bureau of Land Management district or field offices. Results are accompanied by a relatively high level of uncertainty associated with model outputs, valuation methods, and discount rates applied. Further guidance on representing uncertainty and applying uncertain results in decisionmaking would benefit both tool developers and those offices in using ecosystem services to compare management tradeoffs. Decisionmakers and Bureau of Land Management managers at the State-, district-, and field-office level would also benefit from continuing model improvements, training, and guidance on tool use that can be provided by the U.S. Geological Survey, the Bureau of Land Management, and the Department of the Interior. Tradeoffs were identified in the level of effort needed to parameterize and run tools and the amount and quality of information they provide to the decision process. We found the Wildlife Habitat Benefits Estimation Toolkit, Ecosystem Services Review, and United Nations Environment Programme–World Conservation Monitoring Centre Ecosystem Services Toolkit to be immediately feasible for application by the Bureau of Land Management, given proper guidance on their use. It is also feasible for the Bureau of Land Management to use the InVEST model, but in early 2012 the process of parameterizing the model required resources and expertise that are unlikely to be available in most Bureau of Land Management district or field offices. Application of past primary valuation is feasible, but developing new primary-valuation studies is too time consuming for regular application. Value transfer approaches (aside from the Wildlife Habitat Benefits Estimation Toolkit) are best applied carefully on the basis of guidelines described in this report, to reduce transfer error. The ARIES model can provide useful information in regions modeled in the past (Arizona, California, Colorado, and Washington), but it lacks some features that will improve its usability, such as a generalized model that could be applied anywhere in the United States. Eleven other tools described in this report could become useful as the tools more fully develop, in high-profile cases for which additional resources are available for tool application or in case-study regions where place-specific models have already been developed. To improve the value of these tools in decisionmaking, we suggest scientific needs that agencies such as U.S. Geological Survey can help meet—for instance, development and support of data archives. Such archives could greatly reduce resource needs and improve the reliability and consistency of results. Given the rapid state of evolution in the field, periodic follow-up studies on ecosystem services tools would help to ensure that the Bureau of Land Management and other public land management agencies are kept up to date on new tools and features that bring ecosystem services closer to readiness for use in regular decisionmaking.

Arizona;Sonora↗
USGS2012

Impacts of climate change on ecosystem services

Key Findings By 2050, climate change will triple the fraction of counties in the U.S. that are at high or extremely high risk of outstripping their water supplies (from 10 percent to 32 percent). The most at risk areas in the U.S. are the West, Southwest and Great Plains regions. Regulation of drinking water quality will be strained as high rainfall and river discharge conditions may lead to higher levels of nitrogen in rivers and greater risk of waterborne disease outbreaks. Climate change will have uneven effects on timber production across the U.S. Recent increases in tree mortality due to disease and pests, and the intensity of fires and area burned will continue to destroy productive forests. On the other hand, in some regions climate change is expected to boost overall forest productivity due to longer growing seasons. There is a better than 50 percent chance that climate change will overwhelm the ability of natural systems to mitigate the harm to people resulting from extreme weather events (such as heat waves, heavy rains, and drought). Vulnerability of people and property in coastal areas is highly likely to increase dramatically – due to the effects of sea-level rise, storm surge, and the loss of habitats that provide protection from flooding and erosion. The areas at greatest risk to coastal hazards in the U.S. are the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. The human communities most vulnerable to climate-related increases in coastal hazards are the elderly and the poor who are less able to respond quickly before and during hazards and to respond over the long term through relocation. Changes in abundance and ranges of commercially important marine fish are highly likely to result in loss of some local fisheries, and increases in value for others if fishing communities and management practices can adapt. In recreation and tourism, the greatest negative climate impacts will continue to be felt in winter sports and beach recreation (due to coastal erosion). Other forms of recreation are highly likely to increase due to better weather, leading to a redistribution of the industry and its economic impacts, with visitors and tourism dollars shifting away from some communities in favor of others. Supporting, regulating, and provisioning ecosystem services all contribute to food security in the United States, and the fate of the nation’s food production are very likely to depend on the interplay of these services and how the agriculture and fishery sectors respond to climate stresses.

Book chapter↗
USGS2011

A GIS application for assessing, mapping, and quantifying the social values of ecosystem services

As human pressures on ecosystems continue to increase, research involving the effective incorporation of social values information into the context of comprehensive ecosystem services assessments is becoming more important. Including quantified, spatially explicit social value metrics in such assessments will improve the analysis of relative tradeoffs among ecosystem services. This paper describes a GIS application, So cia l V alues for E cosystem S ervices (SolVES), developed to assess, map, and quantify the perceived social values of ecosystem services by deriving a non-monetary Value Index from responses to a public attitude and preference survey. SolVES calculates and maps the Value Index for social values held by various survey subgroups, as distinguished by their attitudes regarding ecosystem use. Index values can be compared within and among survey subgroups to explore the effect of social contexts on the valuation of ecosystem services. Index values can also be correlated and regressed against landscape metrics SolVES calculates from various environmental data layers. Coefficients derived through these analyses were applied to their corresponding data layers to generate a predicted social value map. This map compared favorably with other SolVES output and led to the addition of a predictive mapping function to SolVES for value transfer to areas where survey data are unavailable. A more robust application is being developed as a public domain tool for decision makers and researchers to map social values of ecosystem services and to facilitate discussions among diverse stakeholders involving relative tradeoffs among different ecosystem services in a variety of physical and social contexts.

Applied Geography↗
USGS2011

Accounting for the ecosystem services of migratory species: Quantifying migration support and spatial subsidies

Migratory species support ecosystem process and function in multiple areas, establishing ecological linkages between their different habitats. As they travel, migratory species also provide ecosystem services to people in many different locations. Previous research suggests there may be spatial mismatches between locations where humans use services and the ecosystems that produce them. This occurs with migratory species, between the areas that most support the species' population viability – and hence their long-term ability to provide services – and the locations where species provide the most ecosystem services. This paper presents a conceptual framework for estimating how much a particular location supports the provision of ecosystem services in other locations, and for estimating the extent to which local benefits are dependent upon other locations. We also describe a method for estimating the net payment, or subsidy, owed by or to a location that balances benefits received and support provided by locations throughout the migratory range of multiple species. The ability to quantify these spatial subsidies could provide a foundation for the establishment of markets that incentivize cross-jurisdictional cooperative management of migratory species. It could also provide a mechanism for resolving conflicts over the sustainable and equitable allocation of exploited migratory species.

Ecological Economics↗
USGS2010

Flood hazard awareness and hydrologic modelling at Ambos Nogales, United States–Mexico border

Appropriate land‐use, watershed‐management, and flood‐attenuation plans are critical in the cross‐border urban environment known collectively as Ambos Nogales. This paper summarizes methodologies for predicting the watershed response associated with land‐use change within a spatial and temporal context through the use of a hydrological model in a cross‐border setting. The KINEROS2 model is implemented via the Automated Geospatial Watershed Assessment 2.0 geographic information system interface to evaluate the watershed of Nogales, Arizona, and Nogales, Sonora, Mexico, to assess flood vulnerability by quantifying volumes of runoff and peak flow, based on alternative land‐use scenarios. Cross‐border geospatial data acquisition and input to models are described. Discussions about the KINEROS2 model results identify flood‐prone areas, simulate the impact of land‐use change, and evaluate the impact of potential flood‐control interventions in the Ambos Nogales watershed. Products from this research are being used in a comprehensive plan for sustainable development in Ambos Nogales.

Ambos Nogales watershed↗
USGS2010

Assessment of goods and valuation of ecosystem services (AGAVES) San Pedro River Basin, United States and Mexico

A consortium of federal, academic, and nongovernment organization (NGO) partners have established a collaborative research enterprise in the San Pedro River Basin to develop methods, standards, and tools to assess and value ecosystem goods and services. The central premise of ecosystem services research is that human condition is intrinsically linked to the environment. Human health and well-being (including economic prosperity) depend on important supporting, regulating, provisioning, and cultural services that we derive from our surrounding ecosystems. The AGAVES project is intended as a demonstration study for incorporating ecosystem services information into resource management policy and decisionmaking. Accordingly, a nested, multiscale project design has been adopted to address a range of stakeholder information requirements. This design will further facilitate an evaluation of how well methods developed in this project can be transferred to other areas.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2010

Social values for ecosystem services (SolVES): A GIS application for assessing, mapping, and quantifying the social values of ecosystem services-Documentation and user manual, version 1.0

In response to the need for incorporating quantified and spatially explicit measures of social values into ecosystem services assessments, the Rocky Mountain Geographic Science Center, in collaboration with Colorado State University, has developed a geographic information system application, Social Values for Ecosystem Services (SolVES). SolVES can be used to assess, map, and quantify the perceived social values of ecosystem services. SolVES derives a quantitative social values metric, the Value Index, from a combination of spatial and nonspatial responses to public attitude and preference surveys. SolVES also generates landscape metrics, such as average elevation and distance to water, calculated from spatial data layers describing the underlying physical environment. Using kernel density calculations and zonal statistics, SolVES derives and maps the 10-point Value Index and reports landscape metrics associated with each index value for social value types such as aesthetics, biodiversity, and recreation. This can be repeated for various survey subgroups as distinguished by their attitudes and preferences regarding public uses of the forests such as motorized recreation and logging for fuels reduction. The Value Index provides a basis of comparison within and among survey subgroups to consider the effect of social contexts on the valuation of ecosystem services. SolVES includes regression coefficients linking the predicted value (the Value Index) to landscape metrics. These coefficients are used to generate predicted social value maps using value transfer techniques for areas where primary survey data are not available. SolVES was developed, and will continue to be enhanced through future versions, as a public domain tool to enable decision makers and researchers to map the social values of ecosystem services and to facilitate discussions among diverse stakeholders regarding tradeoffs between different ecosystem services in a variety of physical and social contexts.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2010

The use of scenario analysis to assess water ecosystem services in response to future land use change in the Willamette River Basin, Oregon

Human pressures on the natural resources of the United States have resulted in many unintended changes in our ecosystems, e.g., loss of biodiversity, habitat degradation, increases in the number of endangered species, and increases in contamination and water pollution. Environmental managers are concerned about broad-scale changes in land use and landscape pattern and their cumulative impact on hydrologic and ecological processes that affect stream conditions. The type of land use and land cover has direct consequences for most ecosystem services, including water quantity and water quality, erosion control, and biodiversity. As human pressure continues to increase, ecosystem services worldwide are projected to suffer continued loss and degradation, thus reducing the capacity of ecosystems to provide essential goods and services that contribute to human well-being (MEA 2005). The ability to assess, report, and forecast the life support functions of ecosystems is absolutely critical to our capacity to make informed decisions which will maintain the sustainable nature of our environmental services and secure these resources into the future. This study presents an integrated approach to identify areas with potential water quality problems as a result of land cover change projected by stakeholders within a moderately large river basin in the Pacific Northwest (USA). A process-based hydrologic watershed model was used to examine the contribution of land use/land cover to sediment yield, and nitrate and phosphorous loadings, and identify subwatersheds within the Willamette River basin that would be most affected in the year 2050 relative to three possible future scenarios which include inherent differences related to conservation, existing planning trends, and open development. Thus, the objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of alternative future scenarios that describe varying degrees of urban development and human use on hydrological response related to water quality. Results of this study suggest that the amount of forest along streams and agriculture consistently explained a high percentage of variation in nutrients. The AGWA-SWAT model was used to simulate change in sediment yield, nitrate and phosphorus transported with surface runoff for the three future scenarios. With regard to nitrate, the greatest increase was associated with subwatersheds with agricultural land use and urban areas. Although the model predicted some improvement in basin headwaters for all scenarios, nitrate loadings are expected to decrease under the conservation scenario. The largest decrease was observed in the Coast Range. With regard to phosphorous loadings, the lowest reduction was observed in subwatersheds draining predominantly forest areas. The greatest increase was observed under the open development scenario in subwatersheds with agricultural land use. Urbanization and agriculture are presumed to be the major environmental stressors affecting watershed condition of the Willamette River Basin.

Oregon↗
USGS2009

Evaluating hydrological response to forecasted land-use change—scenario testing with the automated geospatial watershed assessment (AGWA) tool

Envisioning and evaluating future scenarios has emerged as a critical component of both science and social decision-making. The ability to assess, report, map, and forecast the life support functions of ecosystems is absolutely critical to our capacity to make informed decisions to maintain the sustainable nature of our ecosystem services now and into the future. During the past two decades, important advances in the integration of remote imagery, computer processing, and spatial-analysis technologies have been used to develop landscape information that can be integrated with hydrologic models to determine long-term change and make predictive inferences about the future. Two diverse case studies in northwest Oregon (Willamette River basin) and southeastern Arizona (San Pedro River) were examined in regard to future land use scenarios relative to their impact on surface water conditions (e.g., sediment yield and surface runoff) using hydrologic models associated with the Automated Geospatial Watershed Assessment (AGWA) tool. The base reference grid for land cover was modified in both study locations to reflect stakeholder preferences 20 to 60 yrs into the future, and the consequences of landscape change were evaluated relative to the selected future scenarios. The two studies provide examples of integrating hydrologic modeling with a scenario analysis framework to evaluate plausible future forecasts and to understand the potential impact of landscape change on ecosystem services.

Conference Paper↗