Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Research and Development Report”

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 271 records · Page 15Linked to original sources
USGS2018

Greater sage-grouse science (2015–17)—Synthesis and potential management implications

Executive Summary The greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ; hereafter called “sage-grouse”), a species that requires sagebrush (Artemisia spp.), has experienced range-wide declines in its distribution and abundance. These declines have prompted substantial research and management investments to improve the understanding of sage-grouse and its habitats and reverse declines in distribution and population numbers. Over the past two decades, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has responded to eight petitions to list the sage-grouse under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, with the completion of the most recent listing determination in September 2015. At that time, the USFWS determined that the sage-grouse did not warrant a listing, primarily because of the large scale science-based conservation and planning efforts completed or started by Federal, State, local agencies, private landowners, and other entities across the range. The planning efforts culminated in the development of the 2015 Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Forest Service Land Use Plan Amendments, which provided regulatory certainty and commitment from Federal land-management agencies to limit, mitigate, and track anthropogenic disturbance and implement other sage-grouse conservation measures. After these policy decisions, the scientific community has continued to refine and expand the knowledge available to inform implementation of management actions, increase the efficiency and effectiveness of those actions, and continue developing an overall understanding of sage-grouse populations, habitat requirements, and their response to human activity and other habitat changes. The development of science has been driven by multiple prioritization documents including the “Greater Sage-Grouse National Research Strategy” (Hanser and Manier, 2013) and, most recently, the “Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy Actionable Science Plan” (Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy Actionable Science Plan Team, 2016). In October 2017, after a review of the 2015 Federal plans relative to State sage-grouse plans, in accordance with Secretarial Order 3353, the BLM issued a notice of intent to consider whether to amend some, all, or none of the 2015 land use plans. At that time, the BLM requested the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to inform this effort through the development of an annotated bibliography of sage-grouse science published since January 2015 and a report that synthesized and outlined the potential management implications of this new science. Development of the annotated bibliography resulted in the identification and summarization of 169 peer-reviewed scientific publications and reports. The USGS then convened an interagency team (hereafter referred to as the “team”) to develop this report that focuses on the primary topics of importance to the ongoing management of sage-grouse and their habitats. The team developed this report in a three-step process. First, the team identified six primary topic areas for discussion based on the members’ collective knowledge regarding sage-grouse, their habitats, and threats to either or both. Second, the team reviewed all the material in the “Annotated Bibliography of Scientific Research on Greater Sage-Grouse Published since January 2015” to identify the science that addressed the topics. Third, team members discussed the science related to each topic, evaluated the consistency of the science with existing knowledge before 2015, and summarized the potential management implications of this science. The six primary topics identified by the team were: Multiscale habitat suitability and mapping tools Discrete anthropogenic activities Diffuse activities Fire and invasive species Restoration effectiveness Population estimation and genetics

Open-File Report↗
USGS2002

U.S. Geological Survey Activities Related to American Indians and Alaska Natives Fiscal Year 2002

Information is a resource for Native American governments, communities, organizations, and people. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) provides technical expertise, reports, and other impartial information sources that benefit Native Americans interested in subsistence issues, water, land use, and the health of many parts of the environment. Native self-sufficiency, economic development, and conservation are cultivated through Native decisions informed with USGS data and analyses. The USGS works in cooperation with American Indian and Alaska Native governments, conducting research on water and mineral resources, animals and plants of environmental, economic, or subsistence importance, natural hazards, and geologic resources. Digital data on cartography, mineral resources, streamflow, biota, and other topics are available to American Indian and Alaska Native individuals and institutions. The USGS recognizes the need to learn from and share knowledge with Native peoples. This report describes most of the activities that the USGS conducted with American Indian and Alaska Native governments, educational institutions, and individuals during Federal Fiscal Year 2002. Some of these USGS activities were carried out in concert with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). Others were conducted by Tribes, Tribal organizations, professional societies, and the USGS. A growing number of Tribal governments, educational institutions, and other Tribal organizations have begun using geographic information systems and other digital technologies in recent years. As Tribes become more interested in and more adept at managing digital information, they are seeking relevant data from the USGS more frequently. Using digital technologies provides Tribal governments with additional means of managing lands and resources for the benefit of current and future generations. The USGS recognizes the need to make its information available to Tribal governments, and to work with those governments and other institutions to advance data management capabilities. The USGS also recognizes that Tribal institutions have varying needs, interests, and capacities. The USGS strives to be sensitive to the unique circumstances of each of these institutions while supporting their self-driven evolution. The USGS is responding to these needs by increasing the transfer of scientific information to American Indian and Alaska Native governments and by training employees of those governments to conduct scientific studies and improve scientific data management. The USGS is also encouraging American Indians and Alaska Natives to pursue careers in science and seeking ways to hire Indian and Native students. By identifying, improving, and disseminating information about available hiring mechanisms, the USGS is working to make hiring such students easier, and, therefore, more likely, for USGS managers. The U.S. Geological Survey is the Federal science bureau within the Department of the Interior (DoI). The USGS is non-regulatory and is not a significant manager of Federal or Trust lands or assets. However, as described in this report, there are several types of USGS activities that involve American Indians, Alaska Natives, and their lands. One type of activity is the course of formal studies, conducted through existing USGS programs, that involves collection of specific types of data as well as investigative and research projects. These projects typically last 2 or 3 years, although a few are parts of longer-term activities. Some projects are funded through cooperative agreements, from monies provided to the USGS by individual Tribal governments, or by the BIA. The USGS provides matching funds for cooperative projects. These formal projects may also receive funding from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Indian Health Service (part of the Department of Health and Human Services), or other Federal agencies. The USGS routinely works with its sister bureaus in the Department of the Interior to provide the scientific information and expertise needed to meet the Department's science priorities. Within this context, the USGS and the BIA are cooperating to use USGS information resources to benefit American Indian and Alaska Native peoples and their lands. The second type of USGS activity is less formal, based on initiatives designed and conducted by USGS employees. Frequently involving educational activities, these endeavors are prompted by employee interests, often as collateral issues, that result from one or more USGS employees identifying and responding to an observed need. In these activities, USGS employees help fulfill a mission of the USGS--to prove scientific relevance--while helping their fellow citizens. Increasingly, some of the educational activities are becoming parts of formal USGS projects. USGS employees have also taken the initiative in assisting American Indians and Alaska Natives through participation in several organizations that were created to foster awareness of science among Native peoples and to help build support and communication networks. One such group is the American Indian Science and Engineering Society (AISES). This group sponsors an annual national meeting in which USGS employees participate. USGS employees join this organization on a voluntary basis, bringing the benefits of this expanded network to the USGS, as many employees do with other professional organizations. Each part of the USGS has identified an American Indian/Alaska Native liaison. The USGS has a regional organizational structure, with Western, Central, and Eastern Regions. The regions work in concert with specific scientific disciplines to conduct the scientific mission of the USGS. The regional structure is intended to bring us closer to our customers; we hope that Native Americans and Alaska Natives will use the contacts listed at the end of this report.

Report↗
USGS2007

Selected field parameters from streams and preliminary analytical data from water and macroinvertebrate samples, Central Colorado Assessment Project, task, 2004 and 2005

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Central Colorado Assessment Project (CCAP) began in October 2003 and is planned to last through September 2008. One major goal of this project is to compare the relationships between surface-water chemistry and aquatic fauna in mined and unmined areas. To accomplish this goal, we are conducting a State-scale reconnaissance sampling program, in which we are collecting water and macroinvertebrate samples. Selected results from the first two years of project analyses are reported here. We plan to develop statistical models and use geographic information system (GIS) technology to quantify the relationships between ecological indicators of metal contamination in Rocky Mountain streams and water quality, landscape and land-use characteristics (for example, mine density, geology, geomorphology, vegetation, topography). Our research will test the hypothesis that physicochemical variables and ecological responses to metal concentrations in stream water in Rocky Mountain streams are ultimately determined largely by historical land uses.

Colorado↗
USGS2016

Data from exploratory sampling of groundwater in selected oil and gas areas of coastal Los Angeles County and Kern and Kings Counties in southern San Joaquin Valley, 2014–15: California oil, gas, and groundwater project

Exploratory sampling of groundwater in coastal Los Angeles County and Kern and Kings Counties of the southern San Joaquin Valley was done by the U.S. Geological Survey from September 2014 through January 2015 as part of the California State Water Resources Control Board’s Water Quality in Areas of Oil and Gas Production Regional Groundwater Monitoring Program. The Regional Groundwater Monitoring Program was established in response to the California Senate Bill 4 of 2013 mandating that the California State Water Resources Control Board design and implement a groundwater-monitoring program to assess potential effects of well-stimulation treatments on groundwater resources in California. The U.S. Geological Survey is in cooperation with the California State Water Resources Control Board to collaboratively implement the Regional Groundwater Monitoring Program through the California Oil, Gas, and Groundwater Project. Many researchers have documented the utility of different suites of chemical tracers for evaluating the effects of oil and gas development on groundwater quality. The purpose of this exploratory sampling effort was to determine whether tracers reported in the literature could be used effectively in California. This reconnaissance effort was not designed to assess the effects of oil and gas on groundwater quality in the sampled areas. A suite of water-quality indicators and geochemical tracers were sampled at groundwater sites in selected areas that have extensive oil and gas development. Groundwater samples were collected from a total of 51 wells, including 37 monitoring wells at 17 multiple-well monitoring sites in coastal Los Angeles County and 5 monitoring wells and 9 water-production wells in southern San Joaquin Valley, primarily in Kern and Kings Counties. Groundwater samples were analyzed for field waterquality indicators; organic constituents, including volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds and dissolved organic carbon indicators; naturally present inorganic constituents, including trace elements, nutrients, major and minor ions, and iron species; naturally present stable and radioactive isotopes; dissolved noble gases; dissolved standard and hydrocarbon gases, δ13C of methane, ethane, and δ2 H of methane. In total, 249 constituents and water-quality indicators were measured. Four types of quality-control samples (blanks, replicates, matrix spikes, and surrogates spiked in environmental and blank samples) were collected at approximately 10 percent of the wells. The quality-control data were used to determine whether the groundwater-sample data were of sufficient quality for the measured analytes to be used as potential indicators of oil and gas effects. The data from the 51 groundwater samples and from the quality-control samples are presented in this report.

California↗
USGS2021

Structured decision making and optimal bird monitoring in the northern Gulf of Mexico

The avian conservation community struggles to design and implement large scale, long-term coordinated bird monitoring programs within the northern Gulf of Mexico due to the complexity of the conservation enterprise in the region; this complexity arises from the diverse stakeholders, multiple jurisdictions, complex ecological processes, myriad habitats, and over 500 species of birds using the region for at least some part of their annual cycle. In addition, long-term monitoring over large spatial scales is difficult because of the need for monitoring data to both (1) evaluate management and restoration outcomes, and (2) provide reliable information about the status and trends of bird populations over time. To address these challenges, the Gulf of Mexico Avian Monitoring Network developed a problem statement: “How can a cost-effective monitoring strategy for the Gulf Coast bird community and ecosystem be developed that evaluates ongoing conservation activities and chronic and acute threats; maximizes learning; and is flexible and holistic enough to detect novel ecological threats and evaluate new and emerging conservation activities?” A structured decision-making framework was then used to articulate and quantify stakeholder values related to the problem statement. One use of the stakeholder values was to develop a regional, strategic plan for bird monitoring, which is presented elsewhere. A formal and complete decision support tool for conservation investments in monitoring and research guided by the stakeholder values is presented in this report. The technical aspects of the stakeholder value model and a portfolio analysis that could be used to guide decision making when allocating resources for monitoring activities is described. Whereas the decision analysis presented here could be useful to any decision maker faced with difficult choices about resource allocation, it is designed for decision makers who request monitoring study proposals and then determine which combination of proposals to fund. The portfolio decision support tool is designed to help funding agencies and organizations identify resource allocation strategies to maximize stated objectives. To begin the decision analysis, an objectives hierarchy and quantitative performance metrics from the values of the Gulf of Mexico bird conservation community were created by a panel of regional stakeholders. Each fundamental objective and sub-objective in the hierarchy is composed of several performance metrics. To test the decision support tool, the authors evaluated a combination of monitoring study proposals written for the region and simulated proposals. Each proposal was scored against the performance metrics and used multi-attribute utility theory to combine the multiple objectives into a measure of total monitoring benefit. The total monitoring benefit and costs of each proposal were then used in a constrained optimization routine to identify optimal monitoring portfolios, that is, a combination of activities that maximizes monitoring benefits while meeting cost and other constraints of interest to stakeholders. A graphical solution based on the concept of Pareto efficiency, which is useful in situations when cost constraints and exact budgets are not known, is also provided. Finally, an evaluation of the sensitivity of the decision-making framework to the weights assigned to objectives by stakeholders is included. This decision support tool allows decision makers to identify an optimal suite of monitoring proposals with a transparent portfolio analysis that includes user-defined constraints (such as costs).

Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas↗
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↗
USGS2016

Predictive mapping of seabirds, pinnipeds and cetaceans off the Pacific Coast of Washington

About this report This report supports Washington-led marine spatial planning and responsible stewardship of natural and cultural resources by the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary. Washington state agencies and the sanctuary continually seek the best available science to improve management of marine uses and stewardship of resources (Etheridge et al., 2010; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2015a). This report and associated data provide new, state- and sanctuary-requested information on seabird, pinniped, and cetacean distributions. Through spatial planning, information on species distributions can help to identify high-value conservation areas, minimize adverse effects of ocean uses and mitigate impacts of coastal hazards. Correspondingly, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife has already begun to use the maps of predicted relative density presented in this report to identify ecologically important areas off the Pacific Coast of Washington and apply this information to plan for offshore renewable energy development. This is the culmination of three years of work to compile information on seabirds, pinnipeds, and cetaceans, and advance a modeling framework that can integrate data sets and develop accurate predictions of relative density for important species off the Pacific Coast of Washington. Previous reports, which evaluated existing datasets of at-sea observations (Menza et al., 2014; Kracker and Menza, 2015) and presented superseded versions of seabird models (Menza et al., 2015), provided base information for this report. In addition to the maps in this published report, all new seabird, pinniped and cetacean predictions will be made publicly available as digital geospatial data through the National Centers for Environmental Information. This research supports the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Zone Management Program, a voluntary partnership between the federal government and U.S. coastal and Great Lakes states and territories authorized by the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) of 1972 to address national coastal issues. The act provides the basis for protecting, restoring, and responsibly developing our nation’s diverse coastal communities and resources. To meet the goals of the CZMA, the national program takes a comprehensive approach to coastal resource management – balancing the often competing and occasionally conflicting demands of coastal resource use, economic development, and conservation. A wide range of issues are addressed through the program, including coastal development, water quality, public access, habitat protection, energy facility siting, ocean governance and planning, coastal hazards, and climate change. Accurate maps of seabird and marine mammal distributions are an important tool for making informed management decisions that affect all of these issues.

Washington↗
USGS2013

Tools and data for meeting America's conservation challenges

The Gap Analysis Project (GAP) produces data and tools that help meet critical national challenges such as biodiversity conservation, renewable energy development, climate change adaptation, and infrastructure investment. The GAP is managed by the U.S. Geological Survey, Department of the Interior. GAP supports a wide range of national, State, and local agencies as well as nongovernmental organizations and businesses with scientific tools and data. GAP uses a collaborative approach to do research, analysis, and data development, resulting in a history of cooperation with more than 500 agencies and organizations nationally.

General Information Product↗
USGS2023

Integrated rangeland fire management strategy actionable science plan completion assessment: Restoration topic, 2015–20

Loss and degradation of sagebrush rangelands due to an accelerated invasive annual grass-wildfire cycle and other stressors are substantial management, conservation, and economic issues in the western United States. These sagebrush rangelands comprise a unique biome spanning 11 states, support over 350 wildlife species, and provide important ecosystem services that include stabilizing the economies of western communities. Impacts to sagebrush ecosystem processes over large areas due to the annual grass-wildfire cycle necessitated the development of a coordinated, science-based strategy for improving efforts to achieve long-term protection, conservation, and restoration of sagebrush rangelands, which was framed in 2015 under the Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy (IRFMS). Central to this effort was the development of an Actionable Science Plan (Plan) that identified 37 priority science needs (Needs) for informing the actions proposed under the 5 topics (Fire, Invasives, Restoration, Sagebrush and Sage-Grouse, Climate and Weather) that were part of the collective focus of the IRFMS. Notable keys to this effort were identification of the Needs co-produced by managers and researchers, and a focus on resulting science being “actionable.” Substantial investments aimed at fulfilling the Needs identified in the Plan have been made since its release in 2016. While the state of the science has advanced considerably, the extent to which knowledge gaps remain relative to identified Needs is relatively unknown. Moreover, new Needs have likely emerged since the original strategy as results from actionable science reveal new questions, and possible (yet untested) solutions. A quantifiable assessment of the progress made on the original science Needs can identify unresolved gaps and new information that can help inform prioritization of future research efforts. This report details a systematic literature review that evaluated how well peer-reviewed journal articles and formal technical reports published between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, addressed 10 needs (hereinafter “Needs”) identified under the Restoration topic in the Plan. The topic outlined research Needs for improving restoration success in degraded sagebrush rangelands. We established the level of progress towards addressing each Need following a standardized set of criteria, and developed summaries detailing how research objectives nested within Needs identified in the Plan (“Next Steps”) were either addressed well, partially addressed or remain outstanding (that is, addressed poorly) in the literature through 2020. Our searches resulted in the inclusion of 371 science products that at least partially addressed a Need identified in the Restoration topic. The Needs that were well and partially addressed included: the development of methods to improve seeding success of native plants after fire; evaluation of short- and long-term plant responses relative to biotic and abiotic factors following restoration treatments; assessments of long-term effects on ecosystem processes following conifer removal treatments and development of decision support tools to aid in conifer management; determination of the costs of restoration treatments relative to the benefits to sage-grouse occupancy, survival, and populations; and assessments of the factors which contribute to soil degradation and development of soil enhancement methods that enhance seed germination and seedling survival while resisting nonnative plants. Needs that were not addressed well included: the development of methods for the rapid recovery of sagebrush and native herbaceous plants following wildfire and determination of whether treatments benefit sage-grouse and mitigate impacts from fires; determination of thresholds for successful restoration across a range of environmental conditions and development of decision support tools to assist with restoration effectiveness monitoring; and development and evaluation of the utility of seed transfer zones. The information provided in this assessment will assist updating the Plan along with other science strategies.

western United States↗
USGS2025

Second Integrated Hydro-Terrestrial Modeling (IHTM 2.0) workshop: USGCRP federal agency perspectives

U.S. federal leadership, mobilizing close interagency coordination across sectors, is key to tackling compound climate and human impacts on our nation’s water resources. Recognizing this need, federal agencies and academic collaborators conducted a series of workshops to advance Integrated Hydro-Terrestrial Modeling (IHTM). IHTM is focused on supporting a multiscale framework to accelerate research insights, better integrate operational and planning perspectives, and bridge national-to-regional capabilities to address major interdependent societal water challenges. This framework leverages the capabilities of different agencies and institutional partners across sectors to advance a shared vision for use-inspired modeling and open science. The IHTM conceptual framework has developed over several community workshops in recent years: ● In September 2019, a community coordinating group on IHTM hosted an interagency workshop (“IHTM 1.0”) with support from NSF, DOE, and USGS. The resulting report identified the need for agencies to invest resources in designing pilot use cases, setting the stage for an integrated national IHTM capability. ● In November 2020, the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) held a virtual Coastal-IHTM (C-IHTM) workshop in collaboration with the MultiSector Dynamics Community of Practice, which engages researchers across universities and national labs. Building on IHTM 1.0, this workshop aimed to identify coastal modeling capabilities and appropriate coastal applications of the IHTM framework. The workshop report detailed needs for open science, geographical or topical use cases, integrated modeling frameworks, and linking communities of practice. ● From October 31 to November 2, 2023, USGCRP hosted a hybrid IHTM 2.0 community workshop that brought together 160 scientists and managers from nine federal departments/agencies (DHS-FEMA, DOC-NOAA, DoD-USACE, DOE, DOI [U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), USGS], EPA, NASA, NSF, USDA [ARS, FS, NRCS]) and 32 non-federal academic, non-profit, and private institutions and consortiums. The workshop was organized by a federal Interagency Steering Committee with representatives from DOE, USGS, NSF, NASA, and NOAA, as well as a Scientific Organizing Committee comprising experts from academia and additional federal agency technical experts. The IHTM 2.0 workshop focused on moving the IHTM 1.0 concepts to action by making advances in designing national and regional integrated modeling experiments in five geographic testbeds. These modeling testbeds seek to facilitate collaborative water resources research and assessment that responds to societal needs, extending from basic research to resource management operations, including the assessment of water quantity, quality, and use at national and regional scales. Ultimately, we envision that the IHTM testbeds will improve our ability to provide water resources assessment scenarios to decision-makers and the public. This document summarizes USGCRP and member agencies’ perspectives of the IHTM 2.0 workshop. Sections 2 and 3 build on the work of the IHTM 2.0 workshop Scientific Organizing Committee to outline the importance of IHTM, summarize the workshop, and propose near- and medium-term IHTM priorities. Section 4 presents select ongoing and potential interagency activities that could help realize the IHTM 2.0 vision and align with three of USGCRP’s strategic goals for this decade: Advancing Science, Informing Decisions, and Engaging the Nation. Finally, Section 5 summarizes this report and offers information about how to connect with USGCRP’s IHTM activities. USGCRP and its member agencies are well-positioned to coordinate federal efforts to enhance IHTM capabilities in the coming years.

Conference Paper↗