Search USGSSearch

USGS · 70223833

U.S. Geological research at Grand Canyon National Park: A century of collaboration

Abstract

(Fairley) When historians describe the decades preceding designation of Grand Canyon National Park (GCNP), they typically focus attention on early scientific studies conducted by John Wesley Powell, Clarence Dutton, and Charles Walcott. All three of these pioneering scientists were employed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), a small Federal agency first established in 1879. Yet rarely do historians mention later contributions of USGS scientists to the subsequent development and interpretation of GCNP. This article attempts to fill this gap. When GCNP was officially designated on February 26, 1919, Grand Canyon was already a popular, internationally renowned tourist destination. Its reputation derived in no small measure from books and articles written by USGS geologists, which included some of the earliest illustrations and photographs of Grand Canyon. In addition to Powell, Dutton, and Walcott , other noteworthy USGS scientists who contributed to Grand Canyon’s early fame included Francois Matthes who, along with topographers John Stewart and Richard Evans, mapped the Canyon’s topography in painstaking detail during the first decade of the 20th century ; Levi Noble, who mapped the Precambrian geology in the Shinumo area in 1909 , and Nelson Darton, who produced the first popular guidebook about Grand Canyon’s geology for distribution by the Santa Fe Railroad . Thus, by the time Grand Canyon was designated as the Nation’s 15th national park, USGS scientists had laid a solid foundation of basic geological knowledge about this remarkable landscape upon which the National Park Service (NPS) could build. But what about the century that followed? In what respects did USGS personnel contribute to the park’s subsequent development and interpretation? The intent of this article is not to recount every scientific study undertaken by USGS scientists in Grand Canyon during the past century. Instead, this article attempts to document the various roles played by USGS professionals, working in collaboration with NPS personnel, to shape the future development and interpretation of the Park.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 35.7019167328534° to 36.78289206199065° latitude; -112.7471923828125° to -111.522216796875° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Helen C. Fairley. 2019. U.S. Geological research at Grand Canyon National Park: A century of collaboration. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70223833

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Loma salmonae and related species

Loma salmonae is a microsporidium that infects Pacific salmon and causes a gill inflammatory syndrome known as microsporidial gill disease of salmon. This disease has been mostly associated with netpen-farmed Chinook salmon ( Oncorhynchus tshawytscha ) in British Columbia, Canada. Clinical, diagnostic, pathological aspects of disease, as well as approaches for disease avoidance in salmon aquaculture are discussed. A laboratory infection model in rainbow trout was used to determine life cycle-stages, transmission dynamics, pathophysiology, influence of temperature, and to test therapeutics applicable to aquaculture. This experimental model has been informative on various approaches of disease control, including the development of a promising vaccine. In addition to improving fish health in salmon farming in North America, this L. salmonae model will be applicable to other microsporidial diseases that may be encountered in emerging aquaculture regions.

Book chapter

Cumulative effects of multiple stressors on marine mammals: Elephant seals as a model system

Noise exposure is a potential stressor for free-ranging marine mammals and is often studied in the absence of other environmental factors. Here, a multi-investigator, interdisciplinary effort was undertaken to examine the response of elephant seals to multiple stressors. An integrated physiological and ecological approach was taken, including immunology, stress physiology, toxicology, animal behavior, population biology, and life history theory, to examine the cumulative effects of exposure to multiple stressors in elephant seals. While we measured the response of individual animals, a population response can be predicted by incorporating these results into the long-term data on elephant seal demographics.

Book chapter

When is a parasite a problem?

A parasite’s perceived societal impact depends on the disease it causes and the perception of the affected host species. For instance, doctors and veterinarians have a mission to treat parasites that infect humans or that impact host species that have some utilitarian or aesthetic value for society. Marine scientists have different concerns than doctors. Although the number of parasites that marine scientists should be concerned about may vary, only 13% of parasites and 6% of host–parasite links might be considered “problematic” in a kelp forest food web. With regard to the many threats to marine ecosystems, these percentages suggest that most parasites and infectious diseases are inconsequential. A related issue is the common expectation that parasites and the impacts that they cause are increasing under stress as ocean environments across the globe degrade. Yet, reports of disease have not increased due to human impacts on the marine environment, where the factors that influence parasitism are more complex. Thus, the expectation that marine parasites create problems, and that the diseases they cause are getting worse, is more likely the exception than the rule.

Book chapter