Search USGS⌕ Search

USGS · 70160109

USA: Glacier National Park, Biosphere Reserve and GLORIA Site

Abstract

The National Park Service of the United States has 388 designated protected areas and parks that include historic and cultural sites as well as ‘natural resource’ parks set aside for their unique and outstanding natural features. Early efforts to create parks were focused on areas of beauty or unusual features but later efforts increasingly aimed to protect biodiversity and intact ecosystems. Protected areas in the National Park Service are found in nearly all the fifty states from Florida to Alaska, with examples of preserved natural environments ranging from coral reefs to the icy summit of Mt. McKinley in Alaska, at 6,187 m. Many of the larger parks have been designated as Biosphere Reserves under the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Man and the Biosphere Programme. The area now managed as Glacier National Park was first set aside as a Forest Reserve in 1897 and then designated as a national park in 1910, six years before a national park service was created to oversee the growing number of parks that the US Congress was establishing. Waterton National Park was created by Canada immediately north of the US–Canada border during the same period. In 1932, a joint lobbying effort by private citizens and groups convinced both the United States and Canada to establish the world’s first trans-boundary park to explicitly underscore and symbolize the neighbourly relationship between these two countries. This became the world’s first ‘peace’ park and was named Waterton–Glacier International Peace Park. The combined park is managed collaboratively on many issues but each national park is separately funded and operates under different national statutes and laws. It was, however, jointly named a Biosphere Reserve in 1976 and a World Heritage Site in 1995. There have been recent efforts to significantly increase the size of Waterton National Park by adding publicly owned forests on the western side of the continental divide in British Columbia, Canada. For the purposes of this chapter, I will emphasize the US portion of the Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park and refer to it as the Glacier Mountain Biosphere Reserve (MBR).

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 48.111099041065366° to 48.99463598353405° latitude; -114.76318359375° to -113.0987548828125° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Daniel B. Fagre. 2004. USA: Glacier National Park, Biosphere Reserve and GLORIA Site. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70160109

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Authoritative knowledge infrastructure for GeoAI: Implications for scientific spatial data providers

Geospatial Artificial Intelligence (GeoAI) increasingly relies on automated analysis of authoritative geospatial data, exposing limitations in data infrastructures originally designed for simple dissemination rather than for knowledge-driven use. From the perspective of scientific spatial data providers, the challenge is enabling GeoAI responsibly while retaining semantic clarity, provenance, reproducibility, and governance. This short paper (i) examines how GeoAI exposed limitations within existing geospatial data infrastructures, and (ii) identifies provider-side requirements for an authoritative knowledge infrastructure. Drawing on GIScience, scientific workflow, and operational AI literature, the paper outlines implications for national mapping organizations that seek to support advanced analytics without jeopardizing scientific rigor or stewardship responsibilities.

Conference Paper↗

Springs of the Catskill Mountains: A conduit flow system in predominantly siliciclastic strata

The Catskill Mountains of New York state are composed of thick sequences of interbedded mudstone, sandstone, and siltstone that are intercalated with thin beds of paludal limestone and calcareous mudstone. Sandstones often contain rip-up clasts of calcareous material at their bases and contain minor amounts of carbonate cement throughout their mass. This minor amount of calcareous material weathers out to produce thin zones of solutional porosity and permeability integrated within perched aquifers that feed perennial hillslope springs. Solutional features are evident within thin carbonate lenses and along fractures in sandstones, occasionally resulting in explorable cave-sized conduits. This study focuses on the behavior of bedrock springs and seeps in the headwaters of the Neversink River basin above the Neversink Reservoir. Bedrock springs are numerous throughout the Catskill Mountains and serve to provide baseflow to the headwater streams that tends to be more persistent during dry times than other baseflow sources. We observed dissolution-influenced conduits within the bedrock, and suffosional conduits within unconsolidated materials. Continuous water temperature at six springs was monitored at hourly intervals from May to October 2022 to investigate the thermal response of groundwater to daily and seasonal changes in air temperature along with event-based meteorological events. Temperature monitoring was augmented at some springs with time-lapse photography to evaluate persistence of flow. The thermal responses of springs to precipitation events were highly variable across sites, with some springs exhibiting flashy responses indicating a strong connection to the surface, while other springs showed muted or no thermal response to events. The seasonal thermal response also varied across sites having lag times of 23-48 days between peak air temperature and peak spring water temperature. The water temperatures and geochemical compositions of these bedrock springs support a conceptual model of multiple residence times, showing both event and seasonal groundwater storage within the conduit flow system that feeds the springs of the Catskill Mountains.

New York↗

Stability changes after weak layer collapse: Insights from an unexpected dataset

While conducting avalanche mitigation or traveling through the backcountry, avalanche professionals sometimes experience a "whumpf": a collapse-mode crack accompanied by surface cracking that does not produce an avalanche. These whumpfs are a clear warning sign of instability in the surrounding terrain. But assessing the collapsed slope itself, if it is steep enough to avalanche, carries much more uncertainty. Can slopes that whumpf and are steep enough to slide still avalanche? The answer to this question supports avalanche mitigators and ski guides in assessing whether to open such slopes. Previous research on collapsed slopes is limited to one study conducted before tests that estimate crack propagation propensity, such as the Propagation Saw Test (PST), were developed. This work showed that weak layer shear strength decreased immediately after collapsing and then increased over time. However, no research has examined crack propagation propensity after a whumpf. Studying propagation propensity is key for assessing how whumpfs immediately affect slope stability. To improve our understanding of changes in propagation propensity following weak layer collapse, we conducted PSTs on a test slope in the hours and days after an unexpected collapse occurred on a layer of surface hoar. Two PSTs at our study site three days prior to this collapse provided an estimate of weak layer propagation propensity. PST cut lengths decreased immediately following the collapse, suggesting that the collapse increased the propagation propensity. However, over the next 4-5 hours, PST cut lengths steadily increased at our site, likely due to ongoing sintering and strengthening in the collapsed weak layer. By the end of day two, we were no longer able to initiate propagation, suggesting substantial stabilization of the weak layer. Our results support prior findings and observations suggesting that slopes may remain capable of producing avalanches immediately after a collapse but likely stabilize over the next day or two. Although this research does not provide answers about precisely when a slope becomes stable after a collapse, it does highlight uncertainties in our understanding and interpretation of the stability of slopes that have whumped.

Montana↗