Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

R. Andrews

Publications and source records attributed to R. Andrews.

6 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS1990

Earth sciences and emergency management

As understanding of California's earthquake risk had increased over the past decade, there has been a concurrent expansion of interactions between emergency management professionals and earth scientists. The effort have resulted not from a formal plan-though the U.S National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program has provided much of the support for scientific advances since 1977-but from interactions focused on specific projects. three examples stand out, perhaps suggesting how mutually beneficial exchanges can simultaneously enhance science and public safety.

Earthquakes & Volcanoes (USGS)↗
USGS1988

State public policy issues involved with the Parkfield prediction experiment.

The earthquake-prediction experiment at Parkfield may well be the most important such experiment currently underway worldwide. Its importance, however, extends beyond the scientific data that will be gathered and whether those data that will be gathered and whether those data can provide reliable prediction methods. Important public policy lessons are being learned (and are yet to be learned), and these lessons may be transferable to other parts of California and the nation. Indeed, the Parkfield experiment has captured the interest of numerous Californians, including State officials, emergency managers, the news media, and at least some of the public.

Earthquakes & Volcanoes (USGS)↗
USGS1969

The killing efficiency of soft iron shot

A cooperative research effort between the ammunition industry and the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife is aimed at finding a suitable non-toxic substitute for lead shot. A contract study by an independent research organization evaluated ways of coating or detoxifying lead shot or replacing it with another metal. As a result of that study, the only promising candidate is soft iron. Previous tests of hard iron shot had suggested that its killing effectiveness was poor at longer ranges due to the lower density. In addition, its hardness caused excessive damage to shotgun barrels. A unique, automated shooting facility was constructed at the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center to test the killing effectiveness of soft iron shot under controlled conditions. Tethered game-farm mallards were transported across a shooting point in a manner simulating free flight. A microswitch triggered a mounted shotgun so that each shot was 'perfect.' A soft iron shot, in Number 4 size, was produced by the ammunition industry and loaded in 12-gauge shells to give optimum ballistic performance. Commercial loads of lead shot in both Number 4 and Number 6 size were used for comparison. A total of 2,010 ducks were shot at ranges of 30 to 65 yards and at broadside and head-on angles in a statistically designed procedure. The following data were recorded for each duck: time until death, broken wing or leg bones, and number of embedded shot. Those ducks not killed outright were held for 10 days. From these data, ducks were categorized as 'probably bagged,' 'probably lost cripples,' or survivors. The test revealed that the killing effectiveness of this soft iron shot was superior to its anticipated performance and close to that obtained with commercial lead loads containing an equal number of pellets. Bagging a duck, in terms of rapid death or broken wing, was primarily dependent on the probability of a shot striking that vital area, and therefore a function of range. There was no indication that iron shot would result in greater crippling loss. Despite the apparent effectiveness of this iron shot, transition to its use in waterfowl hunting is not now possible. The sample used for this test was produced by a laboratory procedure that is unsuitable for manufacture. There is no process for producing soft iron shot in the quantities needed. Industry is doing its best to resolve this problem.

Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Na↗