Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Advances in Water Resources”

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 181 records · Page 10Linked to original sources
USGS2023

Modeling post-wildfire hydrologic response: Review and future directions for applications of physically based distributed simulation

Wildfire is a growing concern as climate shifts. The hydrologic effects of wildfire, which include elevated hazards and changes in water quantity and quality, are increasingly assessed using numerical models. Post-wildfire application of physically based distributed models provides unique insight into the underlying processes that affect water resources after wildfire. This work reviews and synthesizes post-wildfire applications of physically based distributed models by examining the scales and geographic/ecohydrologic distribution of model applications, hydrologic response process representation, model parameterization, and model performance metrics. Highlighted gaps and opportunities for advancing physically based distributed hydrologic response modeling after wildfire include the following: (a) applying models in under-represented geographic (S. America, Africa, Asia) and ecohydrologic regions (arid or dry subhumid climates), (b) incorporating all four major streamflow generation mechanisms (infiltration excess, saturation excess, subsurface storm flow, and groundwater flow), (c) representing integrated vadose zone and saturated zone processes to better capture subsurface streamflow generation, (d) building new remotely sensed model parameterization methods for precipitation interception, infiltration, and overland flow that account for burn severity and recovery, (e) incorporating distributed state variables (e.g., soil moisture, groundwater levels) in model performance assessment, (f) designing model intercomparison studies, including field datasets specifically for post-wildfire model development and validation, (g) linking mechanistic vegetation regrowth models with hydrologic models to improve simulation of process shifts as ecosystems recover, and (h) creating a new community modeling framework to integrate modeling advances across the wildfire science community.

Earth's Future↗
USGS2022

Water priorities for the Nation—U.S. Geological Survey Integrated Water Prediction science program

The U.S. Geological Survey Integrated Water Prediction science program focuses on the development of advanced models for forecasting water use and other components of the water cycle along with water quality attributes such as temperature, water constituents, and ecological conditions. The program also is developing the cyberinfrastructure required to implement national and local-scale models to be used by water resource managers over the decades ahead.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2019

Capacity and area of Grand Lake O’ the Cherokees, northeastern Oklahoma, 2009

In February 2017, the Grand River Dam Authority filed to relicense the Pensacola Hydroelectric Project with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The predominant feature of the Pensacola Hydroelectric Project is Pensacola Dam, which impounds Grand Lake O’ the Cherokees (locally called Grand Lake) in northeastern Oklahoma. Identification of information gaps and assessment of project effects on stakeholders are central aspects of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission relicensing process. Due to the natural changes to the reservoir over time, new capacity and area tables are needed periodically. The most recent complete capacity and area table was produced in 1940. Capacity and area tables identify the relations between the elevation of the water surface and the volume of water that can be impounded at each water surface elevation. This report (1) presents an updated capacity and area table for Grand Lake O’ the Cherokees for 2009, (2) describes the methods used to calculate the updated capacity and area values presented in the table, and (3) compares the updated capacity table to historical capacity tables produced from a survey in 1940 and from a hydrographic survey of the lake by the Oklahoma Water Resources Board in 2009. The new capacity values computed for Grand Lake O’ the Cherokees indicate that capacity at conservation pool elevation has decreased about 157,000 acre-feet or 10 percent since 1940 and capacity at top of dam elevation has decreased about 200,000 acre-feet or 8 percent since 1940. This difference in the capacities could be attributed to the advancements of technologies; the techniques used for surveying lakes have changed from the 1940 survey to the 2009 survey. Another possible reason for loss in capacity could be as time progresses, lakes like Grand Lake O’ the Cherokees slowly impound sediment carried by the rivers that feed into the lakes, thus diminishing the amount of water that the lake holds. The most recent survey used measured water depths and Global Position System collected electronically, but the methods used to collect data in 1940 are unknown. Due to the advancement of technology, the 2009 survey is likely more precise than the 1940 survey.

Oklahoma↗
USGS2019

Examining progress toward achieving the Ten Steps of the Rome Declaration on Responsible Inland Fisheries

Inland capture fisheries provide food for nearly a billion people and are important in the livelihoods of millions of households worldwide. Although there are limitations to evaluating many of the contributions made by inland capture fisheries, there is growing recognition by the international community that these services make critical contributions, most notably to food security and livelihoods in rural populations in those low-income countries with extensive freshwater resources. With the increasing appreciation of the key role of inland fisheries to the health and well-being of human populations globally, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and Michigan State University convened the 2015 global conference, Freshwater, fish, and the future – cross-sectoral approaches to sustain livelihoods, food security, and aquatic ecosystems. What emerged from the interactions between inland fisheries scientists, resource managers, policy makers, and community representatives from across the world, was a forward-looking call-to-action culminating with the 2015 Rome Declaration “Ten Steps to Responsible Inland Fisheries” (FAO and MSU 2016). Four years after this landmark conference and Declaration, we seek to advance discussion on the “Ten Steps,” namely, what successful implementation looks like, assess current examples of implementation, suggest potential signals of progress, and provide some specific, indicative examples of progress for each step. While there are promising signs of progress, we conclude that there remains a strong need to galvanize momentum for sustained action to ensure that inland fish and fisheries are accounted for and incorporated into broader water resource management discussions and frameworks.

Fish and Fisheries↗
USGS2025

Effects of climate change on Midwestern ecosystems: Central and Eastern North American Grassland and Shrubland

The Central and Eastern North American Grassland and Shrubland ecosystem may be increasingly shaped by intensifying drought and shifting seasonality. Rising temperatures and more variable precipitation, marked by longer dry spells, are projected to increase evapotranspiration and soil moisture deficits, and yield more frequent drought. At the same time, warming temperatures are projected to advance spring onset and extend the growing season. Drought may alter habitat structure by accelerating soil erosion, disrupting nutrient cycling, increasing physiological stress on plants, and reducing productivity. These changes are expected to shift community composition toward species adapted to water limitation and fluctuating resources, reducing much of the herbaceous cover that characterizes this ecosystem. Seasonal shifts may restructure habitat by altering phenology and f lowering dynamics, potentially increasing productivity but also heightening the risk of late-season frost damage. Community composition is expected to shift toward early-emerging species, particularly coolseason (C3) grasses, and species with phenological flexibility. Altered phenology may also lead to mismatches between plants and pollinators and increase pollinator competition at the beginning and end of the growing season, with potential consequences for reproduction. Although these overarching stressors affect the entire ecosystem, their specific impacts likely vary with local habitat conditions. In the Central and Northern Tallgrass Prairie, which are historically firemaintained habitats dominated by a mix of warm-season (C4) and cool-season (C3) grasses and forbs, climate change may shift community composition by favoring deep-rooted forbs and established shrubs while displacing shallow-rooted species, including many native grasses. These changes, especially in the absence of fire, may promote woody encroachment and drive long-term community reassembly. In the Central Interior Acidic Open Glade and Barrens, characterized by shallow, drought-prone soils, climate change may reinforce xeric assemblages and reduce the abundance of mesic species. In the absence of f ire, shrubs rather than larger woody species, are more likely to increase, as water limitations constrain the establishment of trees. In the Eastern North American Ruderal Meadow and Shrubland, which lack native species richness and structural stability, disturbance-tolerant invaders may increasingly dominate. Drought and earlier springs are expected to reinforce early successional dynamics and further constrain the restoration potential of these already degraded habitats. Across the region, invasive species, herbivory, and microbial and fungal communities are also expected to respond to climate change. Invasive plants with ruderal traits and flexible phenologies are likely to benefit from drought-driven disturbance, post-drought resource pulses, and longer, earlier growing seasons. These species often germinate and flower earlier than natives, gaining priority access to resources as seasonal timing shifts. Herbivory by increasing white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) populations is expected to intensify, particularly during drought, when plant defenses are weakened, and during extended growing seasons, which prolong forage availability. This selective browsing may contribute to declines in native forbs while indirectly promoting non-native grasses. Microbial and fungal communities, like plant communities, are likely vulnerable to both drought and shifting seasonality. Reduced soil moisture may suppress microbial activity and decomposition, while shifts in fungal community composition, particularly declines in arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi, may impair plant drought tolerance. Adaptation strategies for the Central and Eastern North American Grassland and Shrubland may require managers to anticipate and respond to these changes through both resistance-based approaches, such as restoring fire regimes and reinforcing native species dominance, and acceptance of some potential transitions, such as facilitating drought-tolerant and phenologically flexible species establishment and adjusting fire regimes to align with altered phenology.

Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Miss↗
USGS2013

U.S. Geological Survey ecosystems science strategy—Advancing discovery and application through collaboration

Executive Summary Ecosystem science is critical to making informed decisions about natural resources that can sustain our Nation’s economic and environmental well-being. Resource managers and policymakers are faced with countless decisions each year at local, regional, and national levels on issues as diverse as renewable and nonrenewable energy development, agriculture, forestry, water supply, and resource allocations at the urban-rural interface. The urgency for sound decisionmaking is increasing dramatically as the world is being transformed at an unprecedented pace and in uncertain directions. Environmental changes are associated with natural hazards, greenhouse gas emissions, and increasing demands for water, land, food, energy, mineral, and living resources. At risk is the Nation’s environmental capital, the goods and services provided by resilient ecosystems that are vital to the health and wellbeing of human societies. Ecosystem science—the study of systems of organisms interacting with their environment and the consequences of natural and human-induced change on these systems—is necessary to inform decisionmakers as they develop policies to adapt to these changes. This Ecosystems Science Strategy is built on a framework that includes basic and applied science. It highlights the critical roles that U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists and partners can play in building scientific understanding and providing timely information to decisionmakers. The strategy underscores the connection between scientific discoveries and the application of new knowledge, and it integrates ecosystem science and decisionmaking, producing new scientific outcomes to assist resource managers and providing public benefits. We envision the USGS as a leader in integrating scientific information into decisionmaking processes that affect the Nation’s natural resources and human well-being. The USGS is uniquely positioned to play a pivotal role in ecosystem science. With its wide range of expertise, the Bureau can bring holistic, cross-scale, interdisciplinary capabilities to the design and conduct of monitoring, research, and modeling and to new technologies for data collection, management, and visualization. Collectively, these capabilities can be used to reveal ecological patterns and processes, explain how and why ecosystems change, and forecast change over different spatial and temporal scales. USGS science can provide managers with options and decision-support tools to use resources sustainably. The USGS has long-standing, collaborative relationships with the Department of the Interior (DOI) and other partners in the natural sciences, in both conducting science and applying the results. The USGS engages these partners in cooperative investigations that otherwise would lack the necessary support or be too expensive for a single bureau to conduct. The heart of this strategy is a framework for USGS ecosystems science that focuses on five long-term goals, which are seen as interconnected components that reinforce our vision of the USGS providing science that is at the forefront of decisionmaking: Improve understanding of ecosystem structure, function, and processes. The focus for this goal is an understanding of how ecosystems work, including the dynamics of species, their populations, interactions, and genetics, and how they change across spatial and temporal scales. Advance understanding of how drivers influence ecosystem change. The challenges here are explaining the drivers of ecosystem change, their spatio-temporal patterns, their uncertainties and interactions, and their influence on ecosystem processes and dynamics. Improve understanding of the services that ecosystems provide to society. Here the emphasis is on the measurement of environmental capital and ecosystem services, and the identification of sources and patterns of change in space and time. Develop tools, technologies, and capacities to inform decisionmaking about ecosystems. This includes developing new technologies and approaches for conducting applications-oriented ecosystem science. A principal challenge will be how to quantify uncertainty and incorporate it in decision analysis. Apply science to enhance strategies for management, conservation, and restoration of ecosystems. These challenges include development of novel approaches to monitoring, assessment, and restoration of ecosystems; new methods to address species of concern and communities at risk; and innovations in decision analysis and support to address imminent ecosystem changes or those that are underway. Closely integrated with the five goals are four strategic approaches that provide the path forward for the USGS Ecosystems Mission Area. These approaches cross-cut all of the goals and are seen as essential to the implementation of this strategy: Assess information needs for ecosystem science through enhanced partnerships. Work with the DOI and other agencies and institutions to identify, design, and implement priority decision-driven ecological research. Promote the use of interdisciplinary ecosystem science. Design and conduct interdisciplinary process-oriented research in ecosystem science. Enhance modeling and forecasting. Build models to forecast ecosystem change, assess future management scenarios, and reduce uncertainties through an adaptive learning process. Support decisionmaking. Use quantitative approaches to assess the vulnerabilities of ecosystems, habitats, and species, and evaluate strategies for adaptation, restoration, and sustainable management. Following the four strategic approaches are a set of proposed actions that represent a sampling of specific USGS activities that align with this strategy and that address the Nation’s most pressing environmental needs. The strategy emphasizes coordination of activities across the USGS mission areas pursuant to these goals. Ecosystem science is inherently interdisciplinary and requires a broad perspective that incorporates the biological and physical sciences, climate science, information technology, and scientific capacity in mission areas across the Bureau. With its emphasis on coordination, this strategy can provide a critical underpinning for integrated science efforts with scientists from multiple mission areas of the USGS working together. Of course, the USGS will continue to conduct discipline-specific and interdisciplinary investigations, and both will continue to be vital parts of the ecosystem science portfolio. Finally, the strategy stresses the importance of coordination with other Federal agencies and organizations in the natural resources community. The USGS collaborates with resource agencies in the DOI and other organizations throughout the world to meet societal needs for species and ecosystem management. Working with these agencies and organizations, the USGS will play a key role in guiding sound decisionmaking during the next decade by advancing the scientific foundation for sustaining the natural resources that diverse, productive, resilient ecosystems provide.

Circular↗
USGS2025

Leveraging invasive mussel contaminant survey data for stepwise prioritization of chemicals of potential concern in the Great Lakes basin

Historical and ongoing anthropogenic activities coupled with advancements in analytical techniques have led to the detection of large numbers of contaminants in the Laurentian Great Lakes. Consequently, identifying and prioritizing chemicals likely to cause ecological harm represents a challenge for natural resource managers. Previous prioritization efforts have focused on contaminants in sediment, water, and passive samplers, which may not be representative of compounds that bioaccumulate in aquatic organisms. Consequently, this study adopted a stepwise method to prioritize chemicals of potential concern detected in dreissenid mussels from samples collected across the Great Lakes from 2009–2018. The stepwise method considered environmental fate, detection frequency, and exceedance of toxicity quotients based on ecotoxicological effect concentrations. Overall, 153 compounds out of 267 analyzed were detected in dreissenid mussels, 47 of which had water quality effect concentrations, 56 had apical effect concentrations (Tier 1 ECOTOX or apical screening), 17 had nonapical effect concentrations (Tier 2 ECOTOX, Cytotoxic Burst, and ToxCast) and 33 had estimated effect concentrations (quantitative structure-activity relationship, estimated screening, and pharmacological potency). Of the compounds with water quality effect concentrations, nine were designated as high priority, including the herbicide atrazine and five polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons that were previously identified as potentially hazardous within other matrices. Similar contaminants were identified as high priority in a related study of native unionid mussels in the Great Lakes. A total of 27 compounds were low priority, suggesting that these contaminants do not warrant further action based on this dataset. Overall, these findings will facilitate the development of management strategies to mitigate the effects of contaminants on aquatic organisms within the Great Lakes.

Great Lakes basin↗
USGS2013

Transient calibration of a groundwater-flow model of Chimacum Creek Basin and vicinity, Jefferson County, Washington: a supplement to Scientific Investigations Report 2013-5160

A steady-state groundwater-flow model described in Scientific Investigations Report 2013-5160, ”Numerical Simulation of the Groundwater-Flow System in Chimacum Creek Basin and Vicinity, Jefferson County, Washington” was developed to evaluate potential future impacts of growth and of water-management strategies on water resources in the Chimacum Creek Basin. This supplement to that report describes the unsuccessful attempt to perform a calibration to transient conditions on the model. The modeled area is about 64 square miles on the Olympic Peninsula in northeastern Jefferson County, Washington. The geologic setting for the model area is that of unconsolidated deposits of glacial and interglacial origin typical of the Puget Sound Lowlands. The hydrogeologic units representing aquifers are Upper Aquifer (UA, roughly corresponding to recessional outwash) and Lower Aquifer (LA, roughly corresponding to advance outwash). Recharge from precipitation is the dominant source of water to the aquifer system; discharge is primarily to marine waters below sea level and to Chimacum Creek and its tributaries. The model is comprised of a grid of 245 columns and 313 rows; cells are a uniform 200 feet per side. There are six model layers, each representing one hydrogeologic unit: (1) Upper Confining unit (UC); (2) Upper Aquifer unit (UA); (3) Middle Confining unit (MC); (4) Lower Aquifer unit (LA); (5) Lower Confining unit (LC); and (6) Bedrock unit (OE). The transient simulation period (October 1994–September 2009) was divided into 180 monthly stress periods to represent temporal variations in recharge, discharge, and storage. An attempt to calibrate the model to transient conditions was unsuccessful due to instabilities stemming from oscillations in groundwater discharge to and recharge from streamflow in Chimacum Creek. The model as calibrated to transient conditions has mean residuals and standard errors of 0.06 ft ±0.45 feet for groundwater levels and 0.48 ± 0.06 cubic feet per second for flows. Although the expected seasonal trends were observed in model results, the typical observed annual variation of groundwater levels of about 2 feet was not. Streamflow at the most downstream observation point was about three times larger than simulated streamflow. Because the transient version of the model proved inherently unstable, it was not used to simulate forecast conditions for alternate hydrologic or anthropogenic changes. Adaptation of alternate stream simulation packages, such as RIV, or newer versions of MODFLOW, such as MODFLOW-NWT, could possibly assist with achieving calibration to transient conditions.

Washington↗
USGS2012

The U.S. Geological Survey Ecosystem Science Strategy, 2012-2022 - Advancing discovery and application through collaboration

Ecosystem science is critical to making informed decisions about natural resources that can sustain our Nation’s economic and environmental well-being. Resource managers and policy-makers are faced with countless decisions each year at local, state, tribal, territorial, and national levels on issues as diverse as renewable and non-renewable energy development, agriculture, forestry, water supply, and resource allocations at the urban-rural interface. The urgency for sound decision-making is increasing dramatically as the world is being transformed at an unprecedented pace and in uncertain directions. Environmental changes are associated with natural hazards, greenhouse gas emissions, and increasing demands for water, land, food, energy, mineral, and living resources. At risk is the Nation’s environmental capital, the goods and services provided by resilient ecosystems that are vital to the health and well-being of human societies. Ecosystem science—the study of systems of organisms interacting with their environment and the consequences of natural and human-induced change on these systems—is necessary to inform decision-makers as they develop policies to adapt to these changes. This Ecosystems Science Strategy is built on a framework that includes basic and applied science. It highlights the critical roles that USGS scientists and partners can play in building scientific understanding and providing timely information to decision-makers. The strategy underscores the connection between scientific discoveries and the application of new knowledge. The strategy integrates ecosystem science and decision-making, producing new scientific outcomes to assist resource managers and providing public benefits. The USGS is uniquely positioned to play an important role in ecosystem science. With its wide range of expertise, the agency can bring holistic, cross-scale, interdisciplinary capabilities to the design and conduct of monitoring, research, and modeling and to new technologies for data collection, management, and visualization. Collectively, these capabilities can be used to reveal ecological patterns and processes, explain how and why ecosystems change, and forecast change over different spatial and temporal scales. USGS science can provide managers with options and decision-support tools to use resources sustainably. The USGS has long-standing, collaborative relationships with the DOI and other partners in the natural sciences, in both conducting science and its application. The USGS engages these partners in cooperative investigations that otherwise would lack the necessary support or be too expensive for a single bureau to conduct. The heart of this strategy is a framework and vision for USGS ecosystems science that focuses on five long-term goals, which are seen as interconnected and reinforcing components: • Improve understanding of ecosystem structure, function, and processes. The focus for this goal is an understanding of how ecosystems work, including the dynamics of species, their populations, interactions, and genetics, and how they change across spatial and temporal scales. • Advance understanding of how drivers influence ecosystem change. The challenges here are explaining the drivers of ecosystem change, their spatio-temporal patterns, their uncertainties and interactions, and their influence on ecosystem processes and dynamics. • Improve understanding of the services that ecosystems provide to society. Here the emphasis is on the measurement of environmental capital and ecosystem services, and the identification of sources and patterns of change in space and time. • Develop tools, technologies, and capacities to inform decision-making about ecosystems. This includes developing new technologies and approaches for conducting applications-oriented ecosystem science. A principal challenge will be how to quantify uncertainty and incorporate it in decision analysis. • Apply science to enhance strategies for management, conservation, and restoration of ecosystems. These challenges include development of novel approaches to monitoring, assessment, and restoration of ecosystems; new methods to address species of concern and communities at risk; and innovations in decision analysis and support to address imminent ecosystem changes or those that are underway. Closely integrated with the five goals are four strategic approaches that provide the path forward for the USGS Ecosystems Mission Area. These approaches cross-cut all of the goals and are seen as essential to the implementation of this strategy: • Assess information needs for ecosystem science through enhanced partnerships. Work with the DOI and other agencies and institutions to identify, design, and implement priority decision-driven ecological research. • Promote the use of interdisciplinary ecosystem science. Design and conduct interdisciplinary process-oriented research in ecosystem science. • Enhance modeling and forecasting. Build models to forecast ecosystem change, assess future management scenarios, and reduce uncertainties through an adaptive learning process. • Support decision-making. Use quantitative approaches to assess the vulnerabilities of ecosystems, habitats, and species, and evaluate strategies for adaptation, restoration, and sustainable management. Following the strategic approaches are a set of proposed actions that represent a sampling of specific activities that align with this strategy and that address the Nation’s most pressing environmental needs. The strategy emphasizes coordination of activities across the USGS mission areas pursuant to these goals. Ecosystem science is inherently interdisciplinary and requires a broad perspective that incorporates the biological and physical sciences, climate science, information technology, and scientific capacity in mission areas across the Bureau. With its emphasis on coordination, this strategy can provide a critical underpinning for integrated science efforts with scientists from multiple mission areas of the USGS working together. Of course, the USGS will continue to conduct both discipline-specific and interdisciplinary investigations, and both will continue to be vital parts of the ecosystem science portfolio. Finally, the strategy stresses the importance of coordination with other Federal agencies and organizations in the natural resources community. The USGS collaborates with resource agencies in the DOI and other organizations throughout the world to meet societal needs for species and ecosystem management. Working with these agencies and organizations, the USGS will play a key role over the next decade in advancing the scientific foundation for sustaining the natural resources that diverse, productive, resilient ecosystems provide.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2023

Application of the technology readiness levels framework to natural resource management tools

Technology advancements in fisheries science can provide useful tools to support natural resource management and conservation. However, new technologies may also present challenges for decision makers due to the lack of a standardized process to assess technologies for consideration within management plans. Future technology development in fishery and water resources could benefit from a framework that assigns an appropriate technology development stage and defines the readiness for implementation. Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) are one established research and development scale used throughout engineering and related disciplines that could be applied to natural resource management tools. The TRL assess the maturity of a technology from nascent idea through a fully developed technology. Steps within this scale could provide a general framework for researchers to follow when planning and conducting studies, while similarly providing a standard scale for resource managers to assess readiness for technology transfer and implementation. The goal of this paper is to describe TRL in the context of natural resource management tools and offer this existing framework as one option to facilitate communication between researchers and managers.

Fisheries↗
USGS2016

Building science-based groundwater tools and capacity in Armenia for the Ararat Basin

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) began a study in 2016 to help build science-based groundwater tools and capacity for the Ararat Basin in Armenia. The growth of aquaculture and other uses in the Ararat Basin has been accompanied by increased withdrawals of groundwater, which has resulted in a reduction of artesian conditions (decreased springflow, well discharges, and water levels) including loss of flowing wells in many places (Armenia Branch of Mendez England and Associates, 2014; Yu and others, 2015). This study is in partnership with USAID/Armenia in the implementation of its Science, Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships (STIP) effort through the Advanced Science and Partnerships for Integrated Resource Development (ASPIRED) program and associated partners, including the Government of Armenia, Armenia’s Hydrogeological Monitoring Center, and the USAID Global Development Lab and its GeoCenter. Scientific tools will be developed through this study that groundwater-resource managers, such as those in the Ministry of Nature Protection, in Armenia can use to understand and predict the consequences of their resource management decisions.

Ararat Basin↗
USGS2008

Estimated Probability of Post-Wildfire Debris-Flow Occurrence and Estimated Volume of Debris Flows from a Pre-Fire Analysis in the Three Lakes Watershed, Grand County, Colorado

Debris flows pose substantial threats to life, property, infrastructure, and water resources. Post-wildfire debris flows may be of catastrophic proportions compared to debris flows occurring in unburned areas. During 2006, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, initiated a pre-wildfire study to determine the potential for post-wildfire debris flows in the Three Lakes watershed, Grand County, Colorado. The objective was to estimate the probability of post-wildfire debris flows and to estimate the approximate volumes of debris flows from 109 subbasins in the Three Lakes watershed in order to provide the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District with a relative measure of which subbasins might constitute the most serious debris flow hazards. This report describes the results of the study and provides estimated probabilities of debris-flow occurrence and the estimated volumes of debris flow that could be produced in 109 subbasins of the watershed under an assumed moderate- to high-burn severity of all forested areas. The estimates are needed because the Three Lakes watershed includes communities and substantial water-resources and water-supply infrastructure that are important to residents both east and west of the Continental Divide. Using information provided in this report, land and water-supply managers can consider where to concentrate pre-wildfire planning, pre-wildfire preparedness, and pre-wildfire mitigation in advance of wildfires. Also, in the event of a large wildfire, this information will help managers identify the watersheds with the greatest post-wildfire debris-flow hazards.

Scientific Investigations Map↗
USGS1976

United States Geological Survey Annual Report, Fiscal Year 1975

The Survey resumes the practice of annually summarizing the progress it has made in identifying the Nation's land, water, energy, and mineral resources, classifying federally owned mineral lands and waterpower sites, and in supervising the exploration and development of energy and mineral resources on Federal and Indian lands. The Annual Report for 1975 consists of five parts: * The Year in Review - a review of the issues and events which affected Survey programs and highlights of program accomplishments. * Perspectives - several short papers which address major resource issues and summarize recent advances in the earth sciences. * A description of the Survey's budget, programs, and accomplishments. * A set of statistical tables and related information which documents program trends, workloads, and accomplishments. * A compendium of Survey publications and information services available to the public. One purpose of this report is to increase public awareness and understanding of the Geological Survey's programs and, more generally, of the role of earth sciences information in helping to resolve many of the natural resource conflicts that face our society now and in the years ahead. To be useful, however, information must be available and readily accessible to those responsible for natural resource policy at the time that the decisions are made. This report emphasizes the types of information products and services provided by the Survey and tells how to obtain additional information.

Annual Report↗
USGS2009

Water security - Nation state and international security implications

A terrorist attack such as poisoning and sabotage of the national water supply and water-quality infrastructure of the continental United States or any country, could disrupt the delivery of vital human services, threaten both public health and the environment, potentially cause mass casualties and pose grave public concern for homeland security. Most significantly, an attack on water resources would weaken social cohesion and trust in government. A threat to continuity of services is a potential threat to continuity of government since both are necessary for continuity of operations. Water infrastructure is difficult to protect, as it extends over vast areas across the U.S. and for which ownership is overwhelmingly nonfederal (approximately 85 percent). Since the 9111 attacks, federal dam operators and water and wastewater utilities have established counter measures. Similar measures have been taken in countries around the world. These include enhanced physical security, improved coordination between corporate ownership, Department of Homeland Security, and local law enforcement, and research into risk assessment and vulnerability analysis to ensure greater system safety. A key issue is the proportionate additional resources directed at public and private sector specific priorities. Agencies that have the scientific and technological ability to leverage resources, exploit integrated science approaches, focus on interdisciplinary practices, utilize informatics expertise and employ a wide use of evolving technologies should play a key role in water security and related issues.

Disaster Advances↗
USGS2021

Towards improved environmental modeling outcomes: Enabling low-cost access to high-dimensional, geostatistical-based decision-support analyses

Computer models of environmental systems routinely inform decision making for water resource management. In this context, quantifying uncertainty in the important simulated outputs, and reducing uncertainty through assimilating historic system-state observations, is as important as the numerical model. However, implementing high-dimensional and stochastic workflows are challenging, often requiring that practitioners have theoretical and practical understanding of several advanced topics. Worse, implementing these important analyses can take substantial time and effort. This additional effort is often cited as justification for postponing, or even forgoing, these analyses. Herein, we present scripting tools to facilitate the efficient and repeatable construction of high-dimensional, geostatistical-based PEST interfaces, including uncertainty analyses. As demonstrated, these tools can be applied with minimal effort to a model with varied temporal and spatial discretization. Ultimately, these tools can enable low-cost access to valuable decision-support analyses earlier and more frequently during the modeling workflow.

Environmental Modelling & Software↗
USGS2012

Coastal impacts, adaptation, and vulnerabilities: a technical input to the 2013 National Climate Assessment

The coast has long provided communities with a multitude of benefits including an abundance of natural resources that sustain economies, societies, and ecosystems. Coasts provide natural harbors for commerce, trade, and transportation; beaches and shorelines that attract residents and tourists; and wetlands and estuaries that are critical for fisheries and water resources. Coastal ecosystems provide critical functions to cycle and move nutrients, store carbon, detoxify wastes, and purify air and water. These areas also mitigate floods and buffer against coastal storms that bring high winds and salt water inland and erode the shore. Coastal regions are critical in the development, transportation, and processing of oil and natural gas resources and, more recently, are being explored as a source of energy captured from wind and waves. The many benefits and opportunities provided in coastal areas have strengthened our economic reliance on coastal resources. Consequently, the high demands placed on the coastal environment will increase commensurately with human activity. Because 35 U.S. states, commonwealths, and territories have coastlines that border the oceans or Great Lakes, impacts to coastline systems will reverberate through social, economic, and natural systems across the U.S. Impacts on coastal systems are among the most costly and most certain consequences of a warming climate (Nicholls et al., 2007). The warming atmosphere is expected to accelerate sea-level rise as a result of the decline of glaciers and ice sheets and the thermal expansion of sea water. As mean sea level rises, coastal shorelines will retreat and low-lying areas will tend to be inundated more frequently, if not permanently, by the advancing sea. As atmospheric temperature increases and rainfall patterns change, soil moisture and runoff to the coast are likely to be altered. An increase in the intensity of climatic extremes such as storms and heat spells, coupled with other impacts of climate change and the effects of human development, could affect the sustainability of many existing coastal communities and natural resources. This report, one of a series of technical inputs for the third NCA conducted under the auspices of the U.S. Global Change Research Program, examines the known effects and relationships of climate change variables on the coasts of the U.S. It describes the impacts on natural and human systems, including several major sectors of the U.S. economy, and the progress and challenges to planning and implementing adaptation options. Below we present the key findings from each chapter of the report, beginning with the following key findings from Chapter 1: Introduction and Context.

Book↗
USGS2023

The value of scientific information — An overview

Introduction The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) provides reliable science, data, information, and models (hereafter collectively referred to as “information”) to describe and understand the Earth. This information is used to minimize loss of life and property from natural disasters; manage water, biological, energy, and mineral resources; and enhance and protect quality of life. USGS science informs public and private decisions, operations, and risk management in all major United States economic sectors, as defined by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, and provides critical information for natural resource and natural hazard management and stewardship decisions. Understanding the value of scientific information supports applications of USGS science in land- and water-management decisions, and better informs the public about the return on investment of USGS programs. USGS economists, social scientists, and physical scientists are engaged in collaborative efforts to advance methods to estimate the value of information (VOI) produced by the USGS. These efforts involve collaborating with an international community to develop and refine estimation methods, establish best practices to determine VOI, develop a study repository, and conduct projects to assess the VOI of specific information products and their application. This report focuses on economic valuation conducted by USGS specifically, although the methodology has much broader applicability within the U.S. government, academia, and beyond. Noneconomic valuation techniques for assessing the VOI also exist but are not addressed in this report.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2013

The development and application of a decision support system for land management in the Lake Tahoe Basin—The Land Use Simulation Model

This report describes and applies the Land Use Simulation Model (LUSM), the final modeling product for the long-term decision support project funded by the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act and developed by the U.S. Geological Survey’s Western Geographic Science Center for the Lake Tahoe Basin. Within the context of the natural-resource management and anthropogenic issues of the basin and in an effort to advance land-use and land-cover change science, this report addresses the problem of developing the LUSM as a decision support system. It includes consideration of land-use modeling theory, fire modeling and disturbance in the wildland-urban interface, historical land-use change and its relation to active land management, hydrologic modeling and the impact of urbanization as related to the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board’s recently developed Total Maximum Daily Load report for the basin, and biodiversity in urbanizing areas. The LUSM strives to inform land-management decisions in a complex regulatory environment by simulating parcel-based, land-use transitions with a stochastic, spatially constrained, agent-based model. The tool is intended to be useful for multiple purposes, including the multiagency Pathway 2007 regional planning effort, the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA) Regional Plan Update, and complementary research endeavors and natural-resource-management efforts. The LUSM is an Internet-based, scenario-generation decision support tool for allocating retired and developed parcels over the next 20 years. Because USGS staff worked closely with TRPA staff and their “Code of Ordinances” and analyzed datasets of historical management and land-use practices, this report accomplishes the task of providing reasonable default values for a baseline scenario that can be used in the LUSM. One result from the baseline scenario for the model suggests that all vacant parcels could be allocated within 12 years. Results also include: assessment of model functionality, brief descriptions of the 7 basic output tables, assessment of the rate of change in land-use allocation pools over time, locations and amounts of the spatially explicit probabilities of land-use transitions by real estate commodity, and analysis of the state change from today’s existing land cover to potential land uses in the future. Assumptions and limitations of the model are presented. This report concludes with suggested next steps to support the continued utility of the LUSM and additional research avenues.

Nevada↗