SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Research Status Report”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 235 records · Page 13Linked to original sources

USGS2025

Relative abundance, seasonal occurrence, and distribution of marine birds in the northern Gulf of Mexico

Marine birds in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico have long been poorly studied. Given statutory obligations to protect migratory birds and endangered species, three broad-scale vessel and aerial programs initiated since 2010 have now surveyed the entire northern Gulf. Vessel coverage alone exceeds 700 d and 74,000 km of observer effort using 300-m strip transects. We supplemented these survey data with earlier, smaller-scale studies, eBird checklists, literature reviews, and other less accessible sources to create snapshot summaries of relative abundance, seasonal occurrence, and regional distribution for 117 taxa of marine and water birds reported from the northern Gulf (113 of which were substantiated with physical evidence). Using taxonomic and functional criteria, we identified 56 taxa characteristic of open shelf, slope, and pelagic waters (federal jurisdiction), 41 taxa with primarily coastal affinities (state and federal jurisdiction), and 20 taxa of sea and diving ducks. High species richness of marine birds in the northern Gulf is attributed to (1) a temperate-to-tropical gradient facilitating diverse marine environments year-round; (2) varied geographic origins of marine bird species using the Gulf; and (3) a mostly enclosed sea basin acting as a vagrant trap for wide-ranging species. Our taxonomic list and status updates seek to bridge information gaps for marine birds now subject to accelerated commercial uses of this region's continental shelf, including newly proposed offshore wind energy development. Other applications include guiding risk and vulnerability assessments of Gulf marine birds, providing core content for seabird observer training, and prioritizing environmental impact reviews and monitoring programs in offshore energy construction and operations plans.

Marine Ornithology: Journal of Seabird Research an↗

USGS2002

Threats to desert tortoise populations: a critical review of the literature

Decision in resource management are generally based on a combination of sociopolitical, economic, and environmental factors, and may be biased by personal values. These three components often contradict each other resulting in controversy. Controversies can usually be reduced when solid scientific evidence is used to support or refute a decision. However, it is important to recognize that data often do little to alter antagonists' positions when differences in values are the bases if the dispute. But, supporting data can make the decision more defensible, both legally and ethically, especially if the data supporting all opposing viewpoints are included in the decision-making process. Resource management decisions must be made using the best scientific information currently available. However, scientific data vary in two important measures of quality: reliability and validity. The reliability of the data is a measure of the degree to which the observations or conclusion can be repeated. Validity of the data is a measure of the degree to which the observation or conclusion reflects what actually occurs in nature. How the data are collected strongly affects the reliability of validity of ecological conclusions that can be made. Research data potentially relevant to management come from different sources, and the source often provides clues to the reliability and, to a certain extent, validity of data. Understanding the quality of data being used to make management decisions helps to separate the philosophical or value-based aspects of arguments from the objective ones, thus helping to clarify the decisions and judgments that need to be made. The West Mojave Plan is a multispecies, bioregional plan for the management of natural resources within a 9.4 million-acre area of the Mojave Desert in California. The plan addresses the legal requirements for the recovery of the desert tortoise ( Gopherus agazzizii ), a threatened species, but also covers an additional approximately 80 species of plants and animals assigned special status by the Bureau of Land Management, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and California Department of Fish and Game. Within the planning area, 28 separate jurisdictions (counties, cities, towns, military installations, etc.) seek programmatic prescriptions that will facilitate streamlined environmental review, result in expedited authorization for development projects, and protect listed and unlisted species into the foreseeable future to avoid or minimize conflicts between proposed development and species' conservation and recovery. All of the scientific data available concerning the biology and management of these approximately 80 species and their habitats must be evaluated to develop a scientifically credible plan. This document provides an overview and evaluation of the knowledge of the major threats to the persistence and recovery of desert tortoise populations. I was specifically asked to evaluate the scientific veracity of the data and reports available. I summarize the data presently available with particular focus on the West Mojave Desert, evaluate the scientific integrity of the data. and identify major gaps in the available knowledge. I do not attempt to provide in-depth details on each study or threat; for more details I encourage the reader to consult the individual papers or reports city throughout this report (many of which are available at most university libraries and at the West Mojave Plan office in Riverside, California). I also do not attempt to characterize or evaluate the past or present management actions, except where they have direct bearing on evaluation of threats, nor do I attempt, for the most part, to acquire, generate, or evaluate new or existing, but uninterpreted data.

California↗

USGS2014

Connecting the dots: a collaborative USGS-NPS effort to expand the utility of monitoring data

The Natural Resource Challenge (National Park Service 1999) was a call to action. It constituted a mandate for monitoring based on the twin premises that (1) natural resources in national parks require active management and stewardship if we are to protect them from gradual degradation, and (2) we cannot protect what we do not understand. The intent of the challenge was embodied in its original description: We must expand existing inventory programs and develop efficient ways to monitor the vital signs of natural systems. We must enlist others in the scientific community to help, and also facilitate their inquiry. Managers must have and apply this information to preserve our natural resources. In this article, we report on ongoing collaborative work between the National Park Service (NPS) and the US Geological Survey (USGS) that seeks to add to our scientific understanding of the ecological processes operating behind vital signs monitoring data. The ultimate goal of this work is to provide insights that can facilitate an understanding of the systems and identify potential opportunities for active stewardship by NPS managers (Bennetts et al. 2007; Mitchell et al. 2014). The bulk of the work thus far has involved Acadia and Rocky Mountain national parks, but there are plans for extending the work to additional parks. Our story stats with work designed to consider ways of assessing the status and condition of natural resources and the potential for historical or ongoing influences of human activities. In the 1990s, the concept of "biotic integrity" began to take hold as an aspiration for developing quantitative indices describing how closely the conditions at a site resemble those found at pristine, unimpacted sites. Quantitative methods for developing indices of biotic integrity (IBIs) and elaborations of that idea (e.g., ecological integrity) have received considerable attention and application of these methods to natural resources has become widespread (Karr 1991; Barbour et al. 1999; Stoddard et al. 2008). Despite widespread use, many questions remain about how metrics are combined to form effective indices and about how to interpret both. Scientists and natural resource specialists within NPS and USGS have joined forces to critique the current analysis methods, with the collaboration involving the Rocky Mountain and Northeast Temperate NPS Inventory and Monitoring (I & M) networks, along with others, and USGS scientists from the National Wetlands Research Center and Patuxent Wildlife Research Center. Funding that initiated the project was from a joint-partnership fund managed by the USGS Ecosystems Program for National Park Monitoring research and the work was focused at Acadia National Park and Rocky Mountain National Park. Here we present synopses of two major issues addressed by the group.

The George Wright Forum↗

USGS2018

Assessing wild juvenile trout ecology in the lower Mountain Fork

Reservoir tailwaters can be valuable fisheries for Rainbow Trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ), which is commonly stocked as mitigation for the altered habitat because it performs well as a put-and-take species in these thermally depressed systems. These fisheries are usually sustained by stocking due to flow fluctuations and lack of suitable spawning habitat that may limit natural reproduction. The Lower Mountain Fork River (LMFR) below Broken Bow Dam in southeastern Oklahoma is one of two year-round trout fisheries in the state and wild, juvenile Rainbow Trout were documented beginning in 2006, prompting speculation about the potential for a self-sustaining population. To determine this potential, we searched several sites over two years throughout the LMFR for wild, juvenile Rainbow Trout to estimate several parameters related to their population status (e.g., age, growth, time of spawning and hatching, and prey use). We also assessed the availability of macroinvertebrate prey to determine how food resources may affect trout sustainability. We found wild, juvenile Rainbow Trout each year, but only at sites within the first 4.5 km of the 19-km tailwater. Juvenile trout were the result of spawning that took place from late January through mid-April. Growth and body condition were variable between years, but similar to other systems. Weekly survival estimates using catch curves were low (<80%), suggesting limited potential for recruitment; however, declining catchability of larger juvenile fish likely biased these estimates. Wild, juvenile Rainbow Trout ate a variety of food items, but selected for Amphipoda and Diplostraca and against Trichoptera. Overlap in diet with adult Rainbow Trout was low (Bray-Curtis dissimilarity = 0.70). Macroinvertebrate prey resources available to trout varied among management zones, being most abundant in Zone 1 and Zone 3. Potential for a wild fishery may exist in the upper portion of the LMFR but additional research on recruitment to adulthood would be required to provide a more definitive answer.

Oklahoma↗

USGS2018

Brown trout in the Lees Ferry reach of the Colorado River—Evaluation of causal hypotheses and potential interventions

Over the period 2014–2016, the number of nonnative brown trout (Salmo trutta) captured during routine monitoring in the Lees Ferry reach of the Colorado River, downstream of Glen Canyon Dam, began increasing. Management agencies and stakeholders have questioned whether the increase in brown trout in the Lees Ferry reach represents a threat to the endangered humpback chub (Gila cypha), to the rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) sport fishery, or to other resources of concern. In this report, we evaluate the evidence for the expansion of brown trout in the Lees Ferry reach, consider a range of causal hypotheses for this expansion, examine the likely efficacy of several potential management interventions to reduce brown trout, and analyze the effects of those interventions on other resources of concern. The brown trout population at Lees Ferry historically consisted of a small number of large fish supported by low levels of immigration from downstream reaches. This population is now showing signs of sustained successful reproduction and is on the cusp of recruiting locally hatched fish into the spawning class, based on analysis with a new integrated population model. The proximate causes of this change in status are a large pulse of immigration in the fall of 2014 and higher reproductive rates in 2015–2017. The ultimate causes of this change are not clear. The pulse of immigrants from downstream reaches in fall 2014 may have been induced by three sequential high-flow releases from the dam in November of 2012–2014, but may also have been the result of a unique set of circumstances unrelated to dam operations. The increase in reproduction may have been the result of any number of changes, including an Allee effect, warmer water temperatures, a decrease in competition from rainbow trout, or fall high-flow releases. Correlations over space and time among predictor variables do not allow us to make a clear inference about the cause of the changes. Under a null causal model, and without any changes to management, we predict there is a 36-percent chance the brown trout population at Lees Ferry will not show sustained growth, and will remain around a mean size of 5,800 adults, near its current size; in contrast, we predict there is a 64-percent chance that the population has a positive intrinsic growth rate and will increase 3–10 fold over the next 20 years. A humpback chub population model linked to the brown trout model suggests an increase of brown trout of this magnitude could lead to declines in the minimum adult humpback chub population over the same time period. Forecasts of rainbow trout abundance, however, suggest that increased abundance of brown trout in the Lees Ferry reach does not pose a threat to the rainbow trout fishery there. There are interventions that may be effective in moderating the growth of the brown trout population in the Lees Ferry reach of the Colorado River. Across causal hypotheses, we predict that removal strategies (for example, a concerted electrofishing effort or an incentivized take program targeted at large brown trout) could reduce brown trout abundance by approximately 50 percent relative to status quo management. Reductions in the frequency or a change in the seasonal timing of high-flow releases from Glen Canyon Dam could be even more effective, but only under the causal hypotheses that involve effects of such releases on immigration or reproduction. Brown trout management flows— dam releases designed to strand young fish at a vulnerable stage—may be able to reduce brown trout abundance to some degree, but are not forecast to be the most effective strategy under any causal hypothesis. We predict that the alternative management interventions would have effects on other resource goals as well, and the pattern of these effects differs across causal hypotheses. The removal strategies would incur direct costs (on the order of $7 million over 20 years) and the mechanical removal strategy is unethical from the perspective of several tribes. The strategies that involve reducing the frequency of high-flow releases from Glen Canyon Dam would decrease the ability to transport and store sediment in the ecosystem, potentially undermining goals associated with sandbar building, recreation, and riparian vegetation, but would increase hydropower revenue. Trout management flows would reduce hydropower revenue. From the standpoint of humpback chub, the alternative strategies largely follow the effect on brown trout; when brown trout abundance is reduced, predation pressure decreases, and humpback chub viability is predicted to increase, but the variation in predicted chub viability is not large across strategies or causal hypotheses. To design a response to brown trout, management agencies will need to navigate both the tradeoffs among resources goals and the uncertainty in the causes of the brown trout expansion. Continued monitoring, possibly coupled with new research or experimental management actions that better inform demographic and ecological dynamics, can help to reduce the causal uncertainty.

Arizona↗

USGS2015

Status and threats analysis for the Florida manatee ( Trichechus manatus latirostris ), 2012

The endangered West Indian manatee ( Trichechus manatus ), especially the Florida subspecies (T. m. latirostris), has been the focus of conservation efforts and extensive research since its listing under the Endangered Species Act. On the basis of the best information available as of December 2012, the threats facing the Florida manatee were determined to be less severe than previously thought, either because the conservation efforts have been successful, or because our knowledge of the demographic effects of those threats is increased, or both. Using the manatee Core Biological Model, we estimated the probability of the Florida manatee population on either the Atlantic or Gulf coast falling below 500 adults in the next 150 years to be 0.92 percent. The primary threats remain watercraft-related mortality and long-term loss of warm-water habitat. Since 2009, however, there have been a number of unusual events that have not yet been incorporated into this analysis, including several severely cold winters, a severe red-tide die off, and substantial loss of seagrass habitat in Brevard County, Fla. Further, the version of the Core Biological Model used in 2012 makes a number of assumptions that are under investigation. A revision of the Core Biological Model and an update of this quantitative threats analysis are underway as of 2015.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2024

Greater sage-grouse habitat of Nevada and northeastern California—Integrating space use, habitat selection, and survival indices to guide areas for habitat management

Executive Summary Greater sage-grouse populations ( Centrocercus urophasianus ; hereafter sage-grouse) are threatened by a suite of disturbances and anthropogenic factors that have contributed to a net loss of sagebrush-dominant shrub cover in recent decades. Declines in sage-grouse populations are largely linked to habitat loss across their range. A key component of conservation and land use planning efforts for sage-grouse involves the continued monitoring and modeling of habitat requirements and suitability across its range. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is addressing the management of sage-grouse habitats on BLM-authorized public lands throughout the western United States through a land use planning amendment and associated environmental impact statement (86 FR 66331). More than 25 percent of the range-wide distribution of sage-grouse is within Nevada and northeastern California, and information on sage-grouse distribution and habitat requirements is important to guide appropriate management decisions. Therefore, the BLM has identified the need for updated spatially explicit information on sage-grouse habitat in Nevada and northeastern California to guide the land use planning amendment and associated management decisions. To address this need, researchers with the U.S. Geological Survey, in close cooperation with multiple State and Federal resource agency partners, including BLM, Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), sought to map sage-grouse distribution and produce example habitat designations in these states. Herein, we report results of our primary study objective, which was to map sage-grouse habitat and create example habitat management areas, based on more than a decade of location and survival data collected from marked sage-grouse across the study region coupled with lek count survey data managed by the NDOW and the CDFW. We expanded on previously developed methodology to incorporate information on habitat selection and survival during reproductive life stages and specific seasons with updated sage-grouse location and known fate datasets, while also including brood-rearing areas that are understood to be threatened and important for population persistence. We combined predictive habitat map surfaces for each life stage and season with updated information on current occupancy patterns to classify habitat based on its suitability and probability of occupancy. We carried out additional steps to delineate specific example habitat management areas, specifically (1) incorporated corridors connecting key nesting and brood-rearing habitat, (2) corrected outputs for pre-wildfire habitat conditions within areas burned in the last 16 years, and (3) masked out areas of anthropogenic development. Our methodological example of deriving habitat management areas was intended to help inform decisions by BLM and other land managers regarding conservation and management of sage-grouse. Associated data products in the form of habitat maps provide updated, detailed, and comprehensive information about the status of habitats and can be useful to partner agencies in their efforts to designate and rank habitats for this species of high conservation concern in Nevada and California, with full recognition that on-the-ground field data and local sources of information and expertise should be used in conjunction with inferences from these models.

California, Idaho, Nevada↗

USGS1979

Distribution and status of marine birds breeding along the coasts of the Chukchi and Bering seas

The Alaska coast fronting on the Chukchi and Bering seas, exclusive of the Aleutian Islands, supports seven complexes of marine bird colonies numbering more than 1 million birds each, nine colonies of 100,000 to almost 1 million birds, and many smaller colonies. Colonies are found on most headlands and islands and are dominated numerically by alcids and kittiwakes (Rissa sp.). Estuarine habitats (mainly the lowlands of northern Seward Peninsula, Yukon-Kuskokwim delta, and the north side of the Alaska Peninsula) are extremely important for breeding and migrating marine waterfowl, shorebirds, gulls (Larus sp.), and terns (Sterna sp.). Information on population size and distribution of breeding marine birds within this area is extensive for only a few of the more heavily hunted species of waterfowl. Except for the intensive and systematic censusing of a few colonies in this region, population data on cliff-, burrow-, and crevice-nesting birds are such that all but gross changes in numbers may go unnoticed, and if noticed they could not be measured.

Research Report↗

USGS2016

Estimating national water use associated with unconventional oil and gas development

The U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Water Availability and Use Science Program (WAUSP) goals are to provide a more accurate assessment of the status of the water resources of the United States and assist in the determination of the quantity and quality of water that is available for beneficial uses. These assessments would identify long-term trends or changes in water availability since the 1950s in the United States and help to develop the basis for an improved ability to forecast water avail- ability for future economic, energy-production, and environmental uses. The National Water Census ( http://water.usgs.gov/watercensus/ ), a research program of the WAUSP, supports studies to develop new water accounting tools and assess water availability at the regional and national scales. Studies supported by this program target focus areas with identified water availability concerns and topical science themes related to the use of water within a specific type of environmental setting. The topical study described in this fact sheet will focus on understanding the relation between production of unconventional oil and gas (UOG) for energy and the water needed to produce and sustain this type of energy development. This relation applies to the life-cycle of renewable and nonrenewable forms of UOG energy and includes extraction, production, refinement, delivery, and disposal of waste byproducts. Water-use data and models derived from this topical study will be applied to other similar oil and gas plays within the United States to help resource managers assess and account for water used or needed in these areas. Additionally, the results from this topical study will be used to further refine the methods used in compiling water-use data for selected categories (for example, mining, domestic self-supplied, public supply, and wastewater) in the USGS’s 5-year national water-use estimates reports ( http://water.usgs.gov/watuse/ ).

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2019

Life-history model for sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) at Lake Ozette, northwestern Washington—Users' guide

Salmon populations spawning in the Lake Ozette watershed of northwestern Washington were once sufficiently abundant to support traditional Tribal fisheries, and were later harvested by settlers. However, in 1974 and 1975, the sockeye salmon ( Oncorhynchus nerka ) harvest decreased to 0 from a high of more than 17,500 in 1949, thus stimulating research into the causes of decrease, which resulted in eventual listing of the population as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1999. The listing status was upheld in 2005 and 2014 following 5-year reviews. Meanwhile, research results were compiled in a limiting factors analysis (LFA) and a recovery plan was developed. Although there has been some improvement in sockeye abundance since listing, the numbers remain too low to allow harvest and it is not yet clear which of the many potential limiting factors are most consequential. As part of the LFA process, a population model was developed to determine values of life-history parameters that would enable the population to survive for 100 years. The model was based on the best available data, but data are limited for the Lake Ozette system. Results informed the qualitative assessment of the importance of limiting factors used to develop the recovery plan for Lake Ozette sockeye. The model was built in Microsoft Excel ® and is difficult to use. The purpose of the model described herein is to synthesize the results of the LFA in a form that can be manipulated by resource managers and the public to create scenarios, test hypotheses, and observe sensitivities of results to changes in parameters. The goal is to provide a tool that enables research, monitoring and management to be focused on the most impactful elements and processes, including identifying the information gaps that are most critical to fill.

Washington↗

USGS2008

A Landscape Indicator Approach to the Identification and Articulation of the Ecological Consequences of Land Cover Change in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed, 1970-2000

The advancement of geographic science in the area of land surface status and trends and land cover change is at the core of the current geographic scientific research of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (McMahon and others, 2005). Perhaps the least developed or articulated aspects of USGS land change science have been the identification and analysis of the ecological consequences of land cover change. Changes in land use and land cover significantly affect the ability of ecosystems to provide essential ecological goods and services, which, in turn, affect the economic, public health, and social benefits that these ecosystems provide. One of the great scientific challenges for geographic science is to understand and calibrate the effects of land use and land cover change and the complex interaction between human and biotic systems at a variety of natural, geographic, and political scales. Understanding the dynamics of land surface change requires an increased understanding of the complex nature of human-environmental systems and will require a suite of scientific tools that include traditional geographic data and analysis methods, such as remote sensing and geographic information systems (GIS), as well as innovative approaches to understanding the dynamics of complex systems. One such approach that has gained much recent scientific attention is the landscape indicator, or landscape assessment, approach, which has been developed with the emergence of the science of landscape ecology.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2011

Objectives, priorities, reliable knowledge, and science-based management of Missouri River interior least terns and piping plovers

Supporting recovery of federally listed interior least tern (Sternula antillarum athalassos; tern) and piping plover (Charadrius melodus; plover) populations is a desirable goal in management of the Missouri River ecosystem. Many tools are implemented in support of this goal, including habitat management, annual monitoring, directed research, and threat mitigation. Similarly, many types of data can be used to make management decisions, evaluate system responses, and prioritize research and monitoring. The ecological importance of Missouri River recovery and the conservation status of terns and plovers place a premium on efficient and effective resource use. Efficiency is improved when a single data source informs multiple high-priority decisions, whereas effectiveness is improved when decisions are informed by reliable knowledge. Seldom will a single study design be optimal for addressing all data needs, making prioritization of needs essential. Data collection motivated by well-articulated objectives and priorities has many advantages over studies in which questions and priorities are determined retrospectively. Research and monitoring for terns and plovers have generated a wealth of data that can be interpreted in a variety of ways. The validity and strength of conclusions from analyses of these data is dependent on compatibility between the study design and the question being asked. We consider issues related to collection and interpretation of biological data, and discuss their utility for enhancing the role of science in management of Missouri River terns and plovers. A team of USGS scientists at Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center has been conducting tern and plover research on the Missouri River since 2005. The team has had many discussions about the importance of setting objectives, identifying priorities, and obtaining reliable information to answer pertinent questions about tern and plover management on this river system. The objectives of this presentation are to summarize those conversations and to share insights about concepts that could contribute to rigorous science support for management of this river system.

Missouri River↗

USGS2015

U.S. Geological Survey science for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative—2014 annual report

This is the seventh report produced by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative (WLCI) to detail annual activities conducted by the USGS for addressing specific management needs identified by WLCI partners. In FY2014, there were 26 projects, including a new one that was completed, two others that were also completed, and several that entered new phases or directions. The 26 projects fall into several categories: (1) synthesizing and analyzing existing data to identify current conditions on the landscape and using the data to develop models for projecting past and future landscape conditions; (2) monitoring indicators of ecosystem conditions and the effectiveness of on-the-ground habitat projects; (3) conducting research to elucidate the mechanisms underlying wildlife and habitat responses to changing land uses; (4) managing and making accessible the large number of databases, maps, and other products being developed; and (5) coordinating efforts among WLCI partners, helping them use USGS-developed decision-support tools, and integrating WLCI outcomes with future habitat enhancement and research projects. The new (completed) project was the development and publication of a public outreach piece for visitors of Fossil Butte National Monument. The final product was a USGS Fact Sheet that capitalized on previously collected elk-monitoring data to interpret the ecology of the Monument’s elk population and the importance of the Monument’s habitats to this highly visible wildlife species. One of the completed projects entailed developing and evaluating a synthetic approach to high-resolution satellite imagery for use in effectiveness monitoring, which culminated in a journal article. The other completed project was a coalescing of two similar tasks under data and information management that pertain to Web application development and the development of outreach and graphic products into a single integrated project that focuses on developing and maintaining/upgrading Web applications and other tools for visualizing, mapping, and using geospatial data. Major accomplishments for FY2014 included several publications, including Part B of an energy resources map that (with Part A) depicts coal, wind, oil, gas, oil shale, uranium, and solar energy production in the WLCI region. Two published works associated with sage-grouse included a Wildlife Monograph on prioritizing species’ habitats across large landscapes, multiple seasons, and novel areas (using sage-grouse in Wyoming as an example), and a USGS Data Series report that includes both the data used in the habitat-prioritization models and the habitat prioritization models developed for sage-grouse. Our Science Team also published a framework for conducting large, collaborative projects that rely on geospatial data, and a paper that describes the efficacy of fusing satellite data collected at various resolutions for measuring and monitoring vegetation changes. These products are all invaluable tools for maximizing the efficiency and effectiveness of managing species of concern, conducting future landscape-scale assessments, and monitoring status and trends of landscape conditions. Other highlights of FY2014 included a renewed effort to gather and analyze wildlife and habitat status and trend data for the WLCI Interagency Monitoring Database (IAMD) to assess long-term trends and cumulative effects associated with land-use and climate changes. Water-monitoring efforts included drilling four new groundwater-monitoring wells in the Green and New Fork River basins near the proposed Normally Pressured Lance Formation energy development, and continued data collection at established water-monitoring sites. Three additional wells were sampled as part of the Wyoming Groundwater Monitoring Network, bringing the total to 19 Network wells sampled in the WLCI region since 2010. Combined, these water-monitoring efforts can help to identify potential changes in water quality or levels that may result from land-use changes. Major terrestrial monitoring accomplishments included processing satellite imagery from 1985−2010 to develop a historical perspective of long-term vegetation changes, which can serve as a basis for monitoring current and future trends in sagebrush steppe. Such data are crucial tools for agencies tasked with sage-grouse management and conservation. The USGS WLCI Science Team also continued monitoring and testing methods for evaluating WLCI habitat treatments designed to promote aspen regeneration and enhance sage-grouse habitat, and to assess how those treatments influence invasive species distributions and ungulate herbivory. Highlights included analyzing field data collected to elucidate the relationships between sage-grouse habitat use and the proximity of energy infrastructure, and using new instruments to measure productivity responses of aspen woodlands to various factors. Numerous FY2014 accomplishments specifically addressed agency needs to manage and conserve Wyoming’s wildlife species of concern. A pygmy rabbit habitat model and Wyoming distribution map were completed to identify factors associated with rabbit habitat occupancy. Previous work on sage-grouse population dynamics was expanded to better understand the factors that drive long-term viability of sage-grouse populations and to develop a tool that helps to identify key factors limiting sage-grouse persistence in Wyoming. Field work and data analyses continued for elucidating the relationships between sagebrush songbird abundance and productivity, the intensity of energy development, and community dynamics of nest predators. For the mule deer study, mixed mountain shrublands important to migrating and wintering mule deer were mapped and delivered to WLCI partners. Additionally, the relationships between energy development and crucial winter habitat for mule deer were evaluated, and a new phase of work was implemented to better understand relationships between plant phenology and mule deer migration movements. Finally, initial analyses of data collected to evaluate fish-community composition in relation to habitat quality indicate that water quality, as measured by concentrations of hydrocarbons, water temperature, and others parameters, has been diminished in subwatersheds with higher levels of energy development. Overall, the outcomes and products of these wildlife studies contribute significantly to the information and tools needed for addressing effects of land-use changes on Wyoming’s species of concern. Finally, capabilities of the WLCI Web site and the USGS ScienceBase infrastructure were maintained and upgraded to help ensure access to and efficient use of all the WLCI data, products, assessment tools, and outreach materials that have been developed. Of particular note is the completion of three Web applications developed for mapping (1) the 1900−2008 progression of oil and gas development;(2) the predicted distributions of Wyoming’s Species of Greatest Conservation Need; and (3) the locations of coal and wind energy production, sage-grouse distribution and core management areas, and alternative routes for transmission lines within the WLCI region. Collectively, these applications tools provide WLCI planners and managers with powerful tools for better understanding the distributions of wildlife species and potential alternatives for energy development.

Wyoming↗

USGS2016

Fisheries research and monitoring activities of the Lake Erie Biological Station, 2015

In 2015, the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Lake Erie Biological Station (LEBS) successfully completed large vessel surveys in all three of Lake Erie’s basins. Lake Erie Biological Station’s primary vessel surveys included the Western Basin Forage Fish Assessment and East Harbor Fish Community Assessment as well as contributing to the cooperative multi-agency Central Basin Hydroacoustics Assessment, the Eastern Basin Coldwater Community Assessment, and Lower Trophic Level Assessment (see Forage and Coldwater Task Group reports). In 2015, LEBS also initiated a Lake Erie Central Basin Trawling survey in response to the need for forage fish data from Management Unit 3 (as defined by the Yellow Perch Task Group). Results from these surveys contribute to Lake Erie Committee Fish Community Goals and Objectives. Our 2015 vessel operations were initiated in early April and continued into late November. During this time, crews of the R/V Muskie and R/V Bowfin deployed 121 bottom trawls covering 83.2 ha of lake-bottom and catching 105,600 fish totaling 4,065 kg during four separate trawl surveys in the western and central basins of Lake Erie. We deployed and lifted 9.5 km of gillnet, which caught an additional 805 fish, 100 (337 kg) of which were the native coldwater predators Lake Trout, Burbot, and Lake Whitefish (these data are reported in the 2016 Coldwater Task Group report). We also conducted 317 km of hydroacoustic survey transects (reported in the 2016 Forage Task Group report), collected 114 lower trophic (i.e. zooplankton and benthos) samples, and obtained 216 water quality observations (e.g., temperature profiles, and water samples). The LEBS also assisted CLC member agencies with the maintenance and expansion of GLATOS throughout all three Lake Erie sub-basins. Within the following report sections, we describe results from three trawl surveys – the spring and autumn Western Basin Forage Fish Assessment and the East Harbor Forage Fish Assessment – and the Lower Trophic Level Assessment conducted in 2015, and examine trends in the fish community structure and trophic status of Lake Erie. Results of our central basin trawl survey are reported in the 2016 Yellow Perch Task Group report.

Report↗

USGS2025

Leveraging artificial intelligence and machine learning to advance Chesapeake Bay research and management: A review of status, challenges, and opportunities

The Chesapeake Bay and its watershed (hereafter “Chesapeake Bay region”) have been the focus of extensive restoration efforts for several decades. These restoration efforts are guided by the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement (Chesapeake Executive Council 2014) which outlines 10 goals and 31 measurable outcomes. The Chesapeake Bay is globally recognized as a model for coastal restoration due to long-term investments in monitoring, modeling, implementation and research by the Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) partnership. These monitoring network spans tidal and non-tidal regions and provides data across multiple scales. Artificial intelligence (AI), particularly machine-learning (ML) and deep learning (DL), has emerged as a powerful tool for analyzing large, complex datasets. These techniques have gained widespread adoption across various disciplines, including ecology, hydrology, and environmental science. In the Bay context, AI/ML is increasingly being used to explore drivers of environmental change, analyze system dynamics, and predict conditions in areas with limited monitoring. The CBP partnership, particularly its Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee (STAC), has increasingly recognized the growing role of AI/ML in watershed and estuarine management. Recent Chesapeake Community Research Symposium sessions and initiatives such as the Chesapeake Global Collaboratory highlight increasing regional momentum to apply big data and AI/ML for environmental solutions. Together, these developments underscore the timely need to explore how AI/ML can help advance Chesapeake Bay restoration and management. This STAC workshop, titled “Leveraging Artificial Intelligence and Machine learning to Advance Chesapeake Bay Research and Management: A review of status, challenges, and opportunities,” was held from February 24-25, 2025, in Edgewater, Maryland to bring together over 50 federal, state, and academic scientists and partners to synthesize the current state of AI/ML applications and identify research gaps in Chesapeake Bay research and management. The workshop focused on three main objectives: 1. Summarize recent AI/ML applications and lessons learned in both tidal and nontidal areas of the Chesapeake Bay region. 2. Identify challenges and gaps in applying AI/ML approaches to Chesapeake Bay data. Such challenges and gaps may include data limitations, harmonization issues, ineffective communication of AI/ML insights, and a lack of coordination among research and management institutions. 3. Develop recommendations and identify opportunities for leveraging AI/ML to address issues across the Chesapeake Bay region. Key areas of focus may include generating new information to support watershed management, delivering AI/MLgenerated insights to managers in a clear and actionable way, and fostering greater collaboration among stakeholders within the CBP Partnership. Workshop participants engaged in science presentations and breakout sessions to develop recommendations for advancing the integration of AI/ML techniques into research and management across the Chesapeake Bay region. By synthesizing current applications, identifying challenges, and exploring new opportunities, the workshop has provided valuable insights and recommendations for better leveraging AI/ML approaches to support the success of Bay restoration efforts. Together, these recommendations provide a roadmap for enhancing data-driven, science-based decision making aligned with the goals and outcomes of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement.

Delaware, Maryland, Virginia↗

USGS2019

Planetary geologic mapping—Program status and future needs

The United States Geological Survey’s (USGS) Planetary Geologic Map Coordination Group (Flagstaff, Ariz.) surveyed planetary geoscience map makers and users to determine the importance, relevance, and usability of such products to their planetary science research and to current and future needs of the planetary science community. This survey was prepared because the planetary science community lacks a modern assessment of the value invested in geoscience map products and processes (including the diverse scientific and technical personnel who add to and maintain this infrastructure) and a strategy that ensures these efforts appropriately prioritize mapping efforts across all solid surface bodies in the Solar System. A 30-question survey was conducted through an online questionnaire and was designed to (1) take <10 minutes, (2) instill a sense that responses would be acted upon, and (3) encourage community participation through a user-friendly interface. The survey made a distinction between “standardized” geoscience maps (those published by the USGS that require adherence to specific cartographic standards, conventions, and principles) and “non-standardized” geoscience maps (those published by other venues such as peer-reviewed journals that are not required to, but might, adhere to some cartographic standards, conventions, and principles). The survey was opened on Sunday, March 18, 2017 (to coincide with the annual Lunar and Planetary Science Conference in The Woodlands, Tex.) and was closed on Thursday, May 25, 2017. There was a total of 265 unique responses that were formulated into 17 unique findings that were matched with one or more recommendations to be addressed by the planetary science community.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2023

Estimating northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) pair detection probabilities based on call-back surveys associated with long-term mark-recapture studies, 1993–2018

The northern spotted owl ( Strix occidentalis caurina ; hereinafter NSO) was listed as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act in 1990 and population declines have continued since that listing. Given the species’ protected status, any proposed activities on Federal lands that might impact NSO require consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and part of that consultation often includes surveys to determine presence and occupancy status of the species in the proposed activity area. The objective of this report is to present study-area specific estimates of the probability of detection for NSO pairs from twelve 2-week seasonal survey periods using data from a recent range-wide meta-analysis. These estimates were a by-product of pair occupancy modeling but might provide insight into potential changes in the effect of the invasive barred owl on NSO detection rates. We used two-species multi-season occupancy models to estimate the probability of detection for NSOs on each of 11 study areas for each 2-week survey period and relative to the range-wide effect of barred owl presence or absence. Detection probabilities within the season generally increased from the earliest surveys in March through mid-season, decreasing again in the late season on five study areas. For three other study areas, detection rates were highest during the earliest survey periods in late March or early April. Estimates of cumulative seasonal detection of NSO (across a maximum of six within-season surveys) were less than 0.90 when barred owls (BO) were present on all but one study area, regardless of when surveys were conducted within a season. However, despite low detection rates, the probability that a territory was occupied when an NSO pair was not detected over six within-season surveys was also very low. When BO are not present on a territory, a six-survey protocol had a high probability of detecting an NSO pair at least once during the season on all study areas, except for the very lowest per-survey estimates. Conducting most surveys earlier in the season, when the probability of detecting pairs is highest (through May on most areas) could improve seasonal detection rates. However, alternative methods of population monitoring—such as the use of passive acoustic recorders—may be needed to continue monitoring NSO for research and management.

California, Oregon, Washington↗

USGS1994

What we know and don't know about amphibian declines in the West

The problem of declining amphibian species is thought to be particularly acute in western North America, but there are many gaps in our knowledge. Although several declines have been well-documented, other declines are anecdotal or hypothesized. Most documented declines are of ranid frogs or toads (Bufo). Species from montane habitats and those occurring in California have been best studied. Status of many desert species is unknown. Habitat destruction and introduced predators are the most common threats to amphibian populations. Some declines may represent natural variation in population size. Causes have not been determined for several cases where common species have declined over large areas. There are important considerations for ecosystem management, whether changes in amphibian populations are natural or caused by human activities. Causes for declines must be known so that management can be prescribed (or proscribed) to eliminate or minimize these causes. The natural variability of amphibian population numbers and the complexity of metapopulation structure emphasize the necessity of considering multiple temporal and spatial scales in ecosystem management. The decline of amphibian species throughout the world has received considerable recent attention (e.g., Blaustein and Wake 1990, Griffiths and Beebee 1992, Yoffe 1992). Much of this attention derives from a workshop held in February, 1990 on declining amphibians sponsored by the National Research Council Board (NRC) on Biology in Irvine, California (Barinaga 1990, Borchelt 1990). Because of media attention in the aftermath of this conference, it is a popular perception that amphibian declines are a new phenomenon that herpetologists have been slow to recognize (Griffiths and Beebee 1992, Quammen 1993). However, concern about amphibian populations in the United States dates back over 20 years. Beginning in the 1960s, a large, well-documented decline of northern leopard frogs (Rana pipiens) occurred in the upper Midwest (Gibbs et al. 1971, Hine, 1981, Rittshof 1975).

Report↗