Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Natural Science”

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 199 records · Page 11Linked to original sources
USGS1999

Of elephants and blind men: Deer management in the U.S. National Parks

Overabundant populations of white-tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ) are becoming common in the eastern United States. Faced with burgeoning deer populations in eastern parks, the National Park Service (NPS) formulated policy based on its long experience with ungulate management in western parks. That the NPS failed to find a management solution acceptable to its many constituencies was inevitable. Like blind men touching different parts of an elephant and disagreeing about its form, those engaged in the debate about deer management in parks are viewing different parts of the ecological system. None has seen the entire system, and consequently, there is neither common agreement on the nature of the problem nor on the solutions. We explore the quandary of deer management in eastern parks by addressing three questions: (1) Can the National Park Service reconcile its management goals with those of its neighbors? (2) Can thresholds be identified for determining when to intervene in natural processes? (3) Is there a scientific foundation for proceeding with effective management of deer? We argue that reconciling the NPS management with that of state conservation agencies is not possible because management policy guides these agencies in opposite directions: the NPS is charged with limiting human impact on ecological processes, and state agencies are charged with exerting human control over population abundance. Questions about thresholds and a scientific basis for management arise from concern that irrupting deer populations are a manifestation of disrupted natural processes. Several population growth paradigms are at the heart of this ecological question. The science provides no consensus about which of these paradigms are appropriate to deer in eastern ecosystems. Thus, it is premature to expect science to identify if or when natural processes have been disrupted. While the NPS cannot effectively achieve its goals without better science, neither can it wait for science to fully understand the dynamics of plant–herbivore interactions. The best hope for resolving both the biological and political dilemmas surrounding deer management is through an adaptive management approach.

Ecological Applications↗
USGS2006

Negotiation Training Courses for Natural Resource Professionals

FORT's Policy Analysis and Science Assistance Branch (PASA) has been conducting and publishing research on multi-party natural resource negotiation since the 1980s. This research has led to the development of basic and advanced negotiation training courses. Each course is two-and-a-half days. Both courses are a mix of lecture, hands-on training, and discussion. Please join us and other natural resource professionals facing similar problems and share your experiences. Come prepared to candidly discuss examples of successes to embrace, stalemates to recognize, and pitfalls to avoid in natural resource negotiations.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2016

Deathcore, creativity, and scientific thinking

Background Major scientific breakthroughs are generally the result of materializing creative ideas, the result of an inductive process that sometimes spontaneously and unexpectedly generates a link between thoughts and/or objects that did not exist before. Creativity is the cornerstone of scientific thinking, but scientists in academia are judged by metrics of quantification that often leave little room for creative thinking. In many scientific fields, reductionist approaches are rewarded and new ideas viewed skeptically. As a result, scientific inquiry is often confined to narrow but safe disciplinary ivory towers, effectively preventing profoundly creative explorations that could yield unexpected benefits. New information This paper argues how apparently unrelated fields specifically music and belief systems can be combined in a provocative allegory to provide novel perspectives regarding patterns in nature, thereby potentially inspiring innovation in the natural, social and other sciences. The merger between basic human tensions such as those embodied by religion and music, for example the heavy metal genre of deathcore, may be perceived as controversial, challenging, and uncomfortable. However, it is an example of moving the thinking process out of unconsciously established comfort zones, through the connection of apparently unrelated entities. We argue that music, as an auditory art form, has the potential to enlighten and boost creative thinking in science. Metal, as a fast evolving and diversifying extreme form of musical art, may be particularly suitable to trigger surprising associations in scientific inquiry. This may pave the way for dealing with questions about what we don´t know that we don´t know in a fast-changing planet.

Research Ideas and Outcomes↗
USGS2016

Landscapes of West Africa: A window on a changing world

Our global ecosystem is and has always been complex, dynamic, and in constant flux. Science tells us how natural forces of enormous power have shaped and reshaped Earth’s surface, atmosphere, climate, and biota again and again since the planet’s beginnings about 4.5 billion years ago. For most of the planet’s history those environmental changes were the result of the interaction of natural processes such as geology and climate and were described on the geological time scale in epochs spanning millions of years. When humankind appeared on Earth around 200,000 years ago the influence of human activity on the environment must have been small and localized. The influence of scattered small groups of people on the global ecosystem would have been overwhelmed by the forces of natural systems (Steffen and others, 207). Human population would not grow to 50 million (about 0.7 percent of the Earth’s current population) for another 197,000 years. Population growth accelerated over the centuries that followed until the planet was adding more than that 50 million people every year. Our planet is now home to roughly 7.3 billion people and we are adding 1 million more people roughly every 4.8 days (US Census Bureau, 2011). Before 1950, no one on Earth had lived through a doubling of the human population, but now some people have experienced a tripling in their lifetime (Cohen, 2003).

Book↗
USGS1990

Landscape ecology: a concept for protecting park resources

The Southwest Region has been supporting Resource Basic Inventory (RBI) efforts to establish baseline data for comparisons with long-term monitoring results to be conducted in the future. This “pulse taking” is a part of the Servicewide initiative being fostered so that resource managers, scientists, and park managers will be able to track the health of park resources by determining changes and trends. The RBI work is being linked with the development of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) at Bandelier, Big Thicket, Big Bend, Padre Island, and Guadalupe Mountains. Many of the parks in the southwest Region have only partially completed RBIs. This informational shortcoming is a pervasive threat to the parks because without detailed knowledge of the parks’ respective resources the Service cannot protect them adequately. To overcome this deficiency, the SWRO’s Division of Natural Resources Management and Science has fostered at Bandelier a pilot research effort, which started in FY ’87 and utilizes a landscape ecology paradigm. This concept links the RBI, GIS, and research activities in a park to present an overall picture of the park in its regional ecosystem setting. The flowchart diagrams this project’s concept. The results have been encouraging. A final report was recently completed (Allen 1989). This concept may now be applied to other Southwest Region parks.

Park Science↗
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↗
USGS2008

Applying the land use portfolio model to estimate natural-hazard loss and risk — A hypothetical demonstration for Ventura County, California

With costs of natural disasters skyrocketing and populations increasingly settling in areas vulnerable to natural hazards, society is challenged to better allocate its limited risk-reduction resources. In 2000, Congress passed the Disaster Mitigation Act, amending the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, Pub. L. 93-288, 1988; Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2002, 2008b; Disaster Mitigation Act, 2000), mandating that State, local, and tribal communities prepare natural-hazard mitigation plans to qualify for pre-disaster mitigation grants and post-disaster aid. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was assigned to coordinate and implement hazard-mitigation programs, and it published information about specific mitigation-plan requirements and the mechanisms (through the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program-HMGP) for distributing funds (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2002). FEMA requires that each community develop a mitigation strategy outlining long-term goals to reduce natural-hazard vulnerability, mitigation objectives and specific actions to reduce the impacts of natural hazards, and an implementation plan for those actions. The implementation plan should explain methods for prioritizing, implementing, and administering the actions, along with a 'cost-benefit review' justifying the prioritization. FEMA, along with the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS), supported the development of HAZUS ('Hazards U.S.'), a geospatial natural-hazards loss-estimation tool, to help communities quantify potential losses and to aid in the selection and prioritization of mitigation actions. HAZUS was expanded to a multiple-hazard version, HAZUS-MH, that combines population, building, and natural-hazard science and economic data and models to estimate physical damages, replacement costs, and business interruption for specific natural-hazard scenarios. HAZUS-MH currently performs analyses for earthquakes, floods, and hurricane wind. HAZUS-MH loss estimates, however, do not account for some uncertainties associated with the specific natural-hazard scenarios, such as the likelihood of occurrence within a particular time horizon or the effectiveness of alternative risk-reduction options. Because of the uncertainties involved, it is challenging to make informative decisions about how to cost-effectively reduce risk from natural-hazard events. Risk analysis is one approach that decision-makers can use to evaluate alternative risk-reduction choices when outcomes are unknown. The Land Use Portfolio Model (LUPM), developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), is a geospatial scenario-based tool that incorporates hazard-event uncertainties to support risk analysis. The LUPM offers an approach to estimate and compare risks and returns from investments in risk-reduction measures. This paper describes and demonstrates a hypothetical application of the LUPM for Ventura County, California, and examines the challenges involved in developing decision tools that provide quantitative methods to estimate losses and analyze risk from natural hazards.

California↗
USGS1976

Nature . . . an environmental yardstick

To one who has spent his professional career in geologic science, conservation always has had special meaning. In the measurements so necessary to his work the geologist develops an integrity in the use of numbers and in the qualifications attending the validity of numbers. Scientific analysis of geologic events and sequence develops a keen sense of what is coincidental, correlative, and consequential. The geologist applies his science in evaluating hazards to man as natural catastrophes and/or benefits to man such as earth materials that form the resource base of his society. But more than these the geologist has acquired a deep appreciation for the planet as a whole, its inner structure, its landscape, and the living things that abound.

Information and Technology Report↗
USGS2021

Annotated bibliography of scientific research on Ventenata dubia published from 2010 to 2020

Integrating recent science into management decisions supports effective natural resource management and can lead to better resource outcomes. However, finding and accessing science information can be time consuming and costly. To assist in this process, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is creating a series of annotated bibliographies on topics of management concern for western lands. Previously published reports introduced a methodology for preparing annotated bibliographies to facilitate the integration of recent, peer-reviewed science into resource management decisions. Therefore, relevant text from those efforts is reproduced here to frame the presentation. Invasive annual grasses are widely distributed throughout the western United States and threaten native ecosystems by altering fire regimes, replacing native plants, and altering grazing patterns, often with tremendous associated costs. One invasive annual grass, Ventenata dubia (hereafter, ventenata), was first introduced to the United States in the 1950s and has recently been identified as a management concern. Ventenata has a wide native geographic range, from Africa to northern Europe, and could thus potentially spread widely in the United States if left unmanaged. We compiled and summarized peer-reviewed journal articles, government reports, and data products on ventenata published between January 1, 2010, and August 27, 2020. We first conducted a systematic search of three reference databases and three government databases using the search phrase: “ventenata” OR “Ventenata dubia.” We refined the initial list of products by removing (1) duplicates, (2) products not written in English, (3) publications that were not focused in North America, (4) publications that were not published as research, data products, or scientific review articles in peer-reviewed journals or as formal technical reports, and (5) products for which ventenata was not a research focus or for which the study did not present new data or findings about ventenata. We summarized each product using a consistent structure (background, objectives, methods, location, findings, and implications) and identified the management topics (for example, species and population characteristics, habitat, control and management efforts) addressed by each product. We also noted which publications included new geospatial data. The review process for this annotated bibliography included an initial internal colleague review of each summary, requesting input on each summary from an author of the original publication, and a formal peer review. Our initial searches resulted in 505 total products, of which 29 met our criteria for inclusion. Nonnative invasive plants; weed management; behavior or demographics; dispersal, spread, vectors and pathways; site-scale habitat characteristics; survival; and weed management subtopic: herbicides were the management topics most commonly addressed. The online version of this annotated bibliography will be searchable by topic, location, and year; it will also include links to each original publication, where available. The studies compiled and summarized here may inform planning and management actions that seek to maintain and restore landscapes and control nonnative invasive species across the western United States.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2007

Land Cover Applications, Landscape Dynamics, and Global Change

The Land Cover Applications, Landscape Dynamics, and Global Change project at U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Center for Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) seeks to integrate remote sensing and simulation models to better understand and seek solutions to national and global issues. Modeling processes related to population impacts, natural resource management, climate change, invasive species, land use changes, energy development, and climate mitigation all pose significant scientific opportunities. The project activities use remotely sensed data to support spatial monitoring, provide sensitivity analyses across landscapes and large regions, and make the data and results available on the Internet with data access and distribution, decision support systems, and on-line modeling. Applications support sustainable natural resource use, carbon cycle science, biodiversity conservation, climate change mitigation, and robust simulation modeling approaches that evaluate ecosystem and landscape dynamics.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2012

The Fort Collins Science Center

With a focus on biological research, the U.S. Geological Survey Fort Collins Science Center (FORT) develops and disseminates science-based information and tools to support natural resource decision-making. This brochure succinctly describes the integrated science capabilities, products, and services that the FORT science community offers across the disciplines of aquatic systems, ecosystem dynamics, information science, invasive species science, policy analysis and social science assistance, and trust species and habitats.

Colorado↗
USGS2012

Distribution and condition of young-of-year Lost River and shortnose suckers in the Williamson River Delta restoration project and Upper Klamath Lake, Oregon, 2008-10--Final Report

The Nature Conservancy undertook restoration of the Williamson River Delta Preserve with a primary goal "to restore and maintain the diversity of habitats that are essential to the endangered [Lost River sucker ( Deltistes luxatus ) and shortnose sucker ( Chasmistes brevirostris )] while, at the same time, minimizing disturbance and adverse impacts" (David Evans and Associates, 2005). The Western Fisheries Research Center of the U.S. Geological Survey was asked by the Bureau of Reclamation to assist The Nature Conservancy in assessing the use of the restoration by larval and juvenile suckers. We identified five obtainable objectives to gauge the habitat suitability for young-of-year suckers in the permanently flooded portions of the two most recently restored sections (Goose Bay and Tulana) of the Williamson River Delta Preserve (hereafter referred to as the Preserve) and its effects on the distribution and health of larval and juvenile suckers. Several of these objectives were met through collaborations with The Nature Conservancy, Oregon State University, Oregon Water Science Center, and Leetown Science Center. Our findings were in concurrence with those of The Nature Conservancy, who found that the Preserve supported young-of-year suckers at least as well as adjacent lake habitats (Erdman and others, 2011) despite the prevalence of non-native and piscivorous species in the system. The Preserve was recolonized by all fishes in the regional species pool, both native and non-native, between the time each portion of the Preserve (Goose Bay and Tulana) was inundated in autumn and the following spring. A large number of fish capable of preying on endangered larval suckers and a few fish that could prey on juvenile suckers were captured in the Preserve, but these species were no more abundant in the Preserve than in adjacent lakes. Larvae and age-0, age-1, and age-2 juvenile Lost River and shortnose suckers were captured in the Preserve, Upper Klamath Lake, and Agency Lake, indicating that these species reared in restored and unaltered lake habitats. We captured too few larval suckers to examine patterns in spatial or temporal distribution. Once endangered suckers transitioned into juveniles, as defined by morphological development, they continued to disperse from shallow to deep water throughout the Preserve and into adjacent lakes. Age-1 and age-2 suckers captured throughout the Preserve and in adjacent lake habitats, especially in spring, show continued use of restored habitat by these species. Quantitative examination of habitat use by age-0 juvenile suckers that accounted for imperfect detection indicated the portion of habitat used increased throughout July and August each year until the entire study area was used by one or more age-0 juvenile suckers by the end of August. Our rigorous evaluation showed both restored Preserve and unaltered lake habitats were equally used by age-0 juvenile suckers. Although all sampled habitats were used, multi-state occupancy models indicated that more age-0 suckers occupied shallow rather than deep habitats within the range of depths we sampled (0.5–4.3 m). We were unable to compare health and condition of juvenile suckers among habitats, due to their movement among habitats. However, documentation of length-weight relationships, afflictions and deformities, and histology indicated juvenile suckers captured in all habitats maintained a similar level of health among the 3 years of our study.

Oregon↗
USGS2013

The SAFRR Tsunami Scenario

The U.S. Geological Survey and several partners operate a program called Science Application for Risk Reduction (SAFRR) that produces (among other things) emergency planning scenarios for natural disasters. The scenarios show how science can be used to enhance community resiliency. The SAFRR Tsunami Scenario describes potential impacts of a hypothetical, but realistic, tsunami affecting California (as well as the west coast of the United States, Alaska, and Hawaii) for the purpose of informing planning and mitigation decisions by a variety of stakeholders. The scenario begins with an Mw 9.1 earthquake off the Alaska Peninsula. With Pacific basin-wide modeling, we estimate up to 5m waves and 10 m/sec currents would strike California 5 hours later. In marinas and harbors, 13,000 small boats are damaged or sunk (1 in 3) at a cost of $350 million, causing navigation and environmental problems. Damage in the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach amount to $110 million, half of it water damage to vehicles and containerized cargo. Flooding of coastal communities affects 1800 city blocks, resulting in $640 million in damage. The tsunami damages 12 bridge abutments and 16 lane-miles of coastal roadway, costing $85 million to repair. Fire and business interruption losses will substantially add to direct losses. Flooding affects 170,000 residents and workers. A wide range of environmental impacts could occur. An extensive public education and outreach program is underway, as well as an evaluation of the overall effort.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2007

Restoring resilience to the Gulf of Mexico coast

Hurricane Katrina and its destructive aftermath in 2005 were unprecedented. Hurricanes Dennis, Rita, and Wilma were also powerful hurricanes affecting the Gulf of Mexico that year. These storms highlighted the need to integrate science that supports restoration of natural landscapes with intelligent coastal planning. The following essay describes both the value and vulnerability of the Gulf of Mexico's northern coast before the storms and the current need to connect science to the human dimension of restoring the coastal landscape. Readers are invited to ponder these concepts as they read the rest of the articles in this report that describe the scientific activities that the U.S. Geological Survey performed in late 2005 and early 2006.

Louisiana↗
USGS1978

Gilbert White talks about natural hazards

Dr. Gilbert White is Director of the Institute of Behavioral Science at the University of Colorado, Boulder, where he is responsible for natural Hazards Research and Applications Information Center supported by the National Science Foundation. He served in the Executive Office of the president in 1941-42, on the Federal Flood Control Policy Task Force in 1964-65, and on the U.S Geological Survey Advisory Panel on Earthquake Studies. Dr. White has authored five books on the social and economic aspects of natural resources, including water supply and river development, and on floods and other natural hazards.

Earthquake Information Bulletin (USGS)↗
USGS2017

A path to actionable climate science: Perspectives from the field

The U.S. Department of the Interior Climate Science Centers (CSCs) work with natural and cultural resource managers and scientists to gather information and build tools needed to help fish, wildlife, and ecosystems adapt to the impacts of climate change. The CSCs prioritize the delivery of actionable science products (e.g., synthesized scientific information, maps, decision support tools, etc.) that are focused on key management priorities and co-produced by teams of scientists and managers. In the specific case of the Northwest CSC, we have been successful at promoting and supporting the co-production of actionable climate science at the individual project level, but it has been more difficult to replicate this success at the regional program level. Here we identify the most significant challenges in satisfying this mandate and propose the creation of a Science Advisory Panel to provide improved interface between resource managers and scientists engaged with the Northwest CSC.

Environmental Management↗
USGS2019

The natural wood regime in rivers

The natural wood regime forms the third leg of a tripod of physical processes that supports river science and management, along with the natural flow and sediment regimes. The wood regime consists of wood recruitment, transport, and storage in river corridors. Each of these components can be characterized in terms of magnitude, frequency, rate, timing, duration, and mode. We distinguish the natural wood regime, which occurs where human activities do not significantly alter the wood regime, and a target wood regime, in which management emphasizes wood recruitment, transport, and storage that balance desired geomorphic and ecological characteristics with mitigation of wood-related hazards. Wood regimes vary across space and through time but can be inferred and quantified via direct measurements, reference sites, historical information, and numerical modeling. Classifying wood regimes with respect to wood process domains and quantifying the wood budget are valuable tools for assessing and managing rivers.

BioScience↗
USGS2022

Opportunities to improve alignment with the FAIR Principles for U.S. Geological Survey data

In 2016, an interdisciplinary, international group of 53 scientists introduced a framework named “the FAIR Principles” for addressing 21st century scientific data challenges. The FAIR Principles are increasingly used as a guide for producing digital scientific products that are findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable (FAIR), especially to enable use of such products in automated systems. Data aligned with the FAIR Principles can increase the efficiency of science integration capabilities such as those envisioned for the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Earth Monitoring, Analyses, and Projections (EarthMAP) initiative. The FAIR Principles clearly define the characteristics of reusable scientific products, but it is less clear how to facilitate consistency in achieving these characteristics across the Bureau. USGS data are produced by local research projects distributed over more than 100 centers in 7 regions. After data are approved for release, they could be managed in numerous repositories and online data systems. The diversity of USGS data is illustrated by the topical range of the USGS mission areas: Core Science Systems, Ecosystems, Energy and Minerals, Natural Hazards, and Water Resources. In the USGS context, realizing the EarthMAP vision for automated, predictive, integrated science that provides timely and actionable results involves providing knowledge and support services and developing the skills, infrastructure, and culture to enable Bureau-wide implementation of the FAIR Principles. In 2019, the USGS Community for Data Integration funded a project to convene a broadly representative workshop and produce recommendations to enable consistency with the FAIR Principles across the USGS. The workshop, held in Fort Collins, Colorado, in September 2019, brought together 28 participants for 3 days to engage with the FAIR Principles, analyze USGS use cases, and discuss the roles of data producers and managers, data storage and catalogs, value-added services, and policy makers in implementing the FAIR Principles. Workshop participants agreed that scientific reproducibility requires the extension of the FAIR Principles beyond measured data to include physical samples, research methods, software, and tools at the USGS. Workshop discussions focused on how the USGS can implement the FAIR Principles by supporting research teams in creating data, metadata, and other scientific products and also by supporting enterprise systems that maintain and leverage the products’ consistency with the FAIR Principles. The resulting FAIR roadmap of recommendations describes nine proposed interdependent strategies that could be achieved by coordinated actions taken by different parts of the USGS. A proposed early action would be the creation of a coordinating council that includes representatives from the groups engaged in activities consistent with better alignment with the FAIR Principles. The nine proposed strategies, which are presented in more detail in this roadmap report, focus on enabling improvements to individual data products, providing infrastructure, and structuring administrative activities to support an organizational culture that values the FAIR Principles.

Open-File Report↗