Results for “Science of Surveying and Mapping” — Page 18

USGS2010

Late Carboniferous through early Jurassic metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia, Chapter 7 in Metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗

USGS2010

Middle Jurassic through Quaternary metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia, Chapter 8 in Metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗

USGS2010

Tectonic and metallogenic model for northeast Asia, Chapter 9 in Metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗

USGS2010

Appendix A: Description of the Northeast Asia Project and Associated Products

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗

USGS2009

Appendix B: Description of Map Units for Northeast Asia Summary Geodynamics Map

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗

USGS2010

Appendix C: Summary of Major Metallogenic Belts in Northeast Asia (the Russian Far East, Yakutia, Siberia, Transbaikalia, Northern China, Mongolia, South Korea, and Japan)

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗

USGS2018

Promoting synergy in the innovative use of environmental data—Workshop summary

From December 2 to 4, 2015, NatureServe and the U.S. Geological Survey organized and hosted a biodiversity and ecological informatics workshop at the U.S. Department of the Interior in Washington, D.C. The workshop objective was to identify user-driven future directions and areas of collaboration in advanced applications of environmental data applied to forecasting and decision making for the sustainability of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Substantial effort to recruit attendees from diverse Federal, State, and private sector organizations successfully attracted participants from 20 Federal agencies and 48 different institutions in the academic, nonprofit, State government, and commercial sectors; the total number of attendees ranged from 100 to 144 during the 3-day workshop. The first one-half of the workshop was divided into 7 plenary sessions and 3 sets of lightning talk sessions organized by sector, providing 48 oral and visual plenary presentations that shared diverse perspectives on biodiversity and ecological informatics, including original biospatial analyses from 6 graduate student map contest winners. The second one-half of the workshop focused on 10 breakout sessions with participant-driven themes from the environmental data sphere and concluded with an address by the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The workshop was structured to encourage interactivity. About 80–90 percent of attendees provided direct feedback using clicker devices for specific questions related to biodiversity and ecological data uses and needs, and 10 breakout session leaders shared the highlights of their group discussions during the final workshop plenary sessions. Participants were encouraged to use the Twitter hashtag #ShareUrData. Over lunch on day 2 there were 20 simultaneous presentations of tools and apps during a special “Tools Café” session. The 10 participant-defined breakout session topics are listed below: Ecosystem services and ecological indicators Inventory and monitoring Biogeographic map of the Nation Pollinators Invasive species Remote sensing Drivers of agricultural change Citizen science Climate Hydrology and watersheds Numerous common themes that emerged from the workshop include the following: The vital importance of completing foundational environmental datasets that are nationally consistent and are essential to multiple sectors, such as the Soil Survey Geographic database high-resolution soils data, a minimum 5-meter resolution digital elevation model, national hydrographic data, high-resolution land cover data, time series high-resolution spatial climate data from historical to future time steps, and a national wetland inventory. Improved, nationally consistent environmental datasets (integrated with targeted observations) will dramatically advance forecasting capacity and support early warning systems (that is, drought, forest disease); however, multiagency coordination should focus on decision support tools that convey appropriate actions and responses to adapt to, and mitigate, potential negative consequences. Digitizing and providing access to the vast stores of underused historical data that can be leveraged for this purpose is of national importance. Modern computational techniques and the ever-increasing flow of environmental data from ground and remote observations can support improved understanding of environmental change. Success of understanding patterns of change for decision making requires establishing baselines from which change can be measured. The value of digitized historical data is greater than ever before. There is a need to recognize the multifaceted potential of citizen science to engage the public in resource stewardship, to create the next generation of science, technology, engineering, math, and environmental leaders, and to have sufficient field personnel to monitor environmental trends, including early detection of alien invasive species, phenological shifts, shifting distribution and abundance of indicator species, and species inventories. The Federal government has an essential role in creating the infrastructure to dramatically improve mobilization of citizen science (and other) data by fostering the following: creation of data standards, creation of nationally consistent framework datasets, vertical integration of observation data, visualization and dissemination of aggregated datasets, and calculation and communication of derived trends. Current and near future trends in the availability of remotely sensed data (rapid expansion of satellite fleets and drones) is revolutionizing access to near-real-time ecological data. Targeted integration with ground-based observations and instrumentation has an extremely valuable role in validating remotely sensed data, filling data gaps, improving data quality, and fully realizing the potential of the near-real-time monitoring of environmental indicator trends. Integrated management of environmental data at the landscape scale is required even as specific actions on the ground are largely local in nature. The workshop highlighted numerous success stories; however, almost every breakout group pointed out the still-too-fragmented nature of the current data landscape. Management and delivery of the necessary data, tools, and analyses to sustain our Nation’s environmental capital must be a collaborative effort between Federal, State, and local governments, academia, nonprofits, and the commercial sector, even though the responsibilities of each sector are different.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2020

Flood-inundation maps for Dardenne Creek in St. Charles County, Missouri, 2019

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 9.9-mile reach of Dardenne Creek, St. Charles County, Missouri, were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Missouri Department of Transportation, St. Charles County, and the Cities of O’Fallon and St. Peters, Mo. The flood-inundation maps, which can be accessed through the USGS Flood Inundation Mapping Program website at https://www.usgs.gov/mission-areas/water-resources/science/flood-inundation-mapping-fim-program , depict estimates of the areal extent and depth of flooding corresponding to selected water levels (stages) at the USGS streamgages 05514860 Dardenne Creek at Old Town St. Peters, Mo., and 05587450 Mississippi River at Grafton, Illinois. Near-real-time stages at these streamgages may be obtained from the USGS National Water Information System at https://doi.org/10.5066/F7P55KJN or the National Weather Service Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service at https://water.weather.gov/ ahps2/ hydrograph.php? wfo= lsx&gage= drcm7 and https://water.weather.gov/ ahps2/ hydrograph.php? wfo= lsx&gage= grfi2 , which also forecasts flood hydrographs at these sites (sites DRCM7 and GRFI2). Flood profiles were computed for the Dardenne Creek stream reach by means of a one-dimensional model for simulating water-surface profiles with steady-state flow computations. The model was calibrated by using the current stage-streamflow relation at the USGS streamgages 05514840 Dardenne Creek at O’Fallon, Mo., and 05514860 Dardenne Creek at Old Town St. Peters, Mo., and the documented high-water marks from the flood of December 2015. The hydraulic model was then used to compute 17 water-surface profiles for flood stages at 1-foot (ft) intervals referenced to the streamgage datum and ranging from 16 ft, or near bankfull, to 32 ft at the reference streamgage 05514860. Stages in the lower Dardenne Creek can be affected by backwater from the Mississippi River; therefore, several sets of water-surface profiles were developed representing the extent of varying levels of backwater as referenced to the USGS streamgage 05587450 on the Mississippi River at Grafton, Ill. The upper stage for each map library exceeds the stage corresponding to the estimated 0.2-percent annual exceedance probability flood (500-year recurrence interval flood) at the streamgage location. The simulated water-surface profiles were then combined with a geographic information system digital elevation model (derived from light detection and ranging data having a 0.26-ft vertical accuracy and 0.71-ft horizontal resolution) to delineate the area flooded at each water level. The availability of these maps, along with real-time information regarding current stage from the USGS streamgage and forecasted high-flow stages from the National Weather Service, will provide emergency management personnel and residents with information that is critical for flood mitigation, preparedness and planning, flood-response activities such as evacuations and road closures, and postflood recovery efforts.

Missouri↗

USGS2009

Availability of Groundwater Data for California, Water Year 2008

The U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources, in cooperation with Federal, State, and local agencies, obtains a large amount of data pertaining to the groundwater resources of California each water year (October 1-September 30). These data constitute a valuable database for developing an improved understanding of the water resources of the State. This Fact Sheet serves as an index to groundwater data for water year 2008. The 2-page report contains a map of California showing the number of wells (by county) with available water-level and water-quality data for water year 2008 (fig. 1) and instructions for obtaining this and other groundwater information contained in the databases of the U.S. Geological Survey, California Water Science Center. From 1985 to 1993, data were published in the annual report 'Water Resources Data for California, Volume 5. Ground-Water Data'; prior to 1985, the data were published in U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2010

Availability of Groundwater Data for California, Water Year 2009

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with Federal, State, and local agencies, obtains a large amount of data pertaining to the groundwater resources of California each water year (October 1-September 30). These data constitute a valuable database for developing an improved understanding of the water resources of the State. This Fact Sheet serves as an index to groundwater data for Water Year 2009. The 2 page report contains a map of California showing the number of wells (by county) with available water-level and water-quality data for Water Year 2009 (fig. 1) and instructions for obtaining this and other groundwater information contained in the databases of the U.S. Geological Survey, California Water Science Center. From 1985 to 1993, data were published in the annual report 'Water Resources Data for California, Volume 5. Ground-Water Data'; prior to 1985, the data were published in U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2011

Availability of groundwater data for California, water year 2010

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with Federal, State, and local agencies, obtains a large amount of data pertaining to the groundwater resources of California each water year (October 1-September 30). These data constitute a valuable database for developing an improved understanding of the water resources of the State. This Fact Sheet serves as an index to groundwater data for Water Year 2010. It contains a map of California showing the number of wells (by county) with available water-level or water-quality data for Water Year 2010 (fig. 1) and instructions for obtaining this and other groundwater information contained in the databases of the U.S. Geological Survey, California Water Science Center. From 1985 to 1993, data were published in the annual report "Water Resources Data for California, Volume 5. Ground-Water Data"; prior to 1985, the data were published in U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers.

California↗

USGS2002

Geologic and aeromagnetic maps of the Fossil Ridge area and vicinity, Gunnison County, Colorado

This data set includes a GIS geologic map database of an Early Proterozoic metavolcanic and metasedimentary terrane extensively intruded by Early and Middle Proterozoic granitic plutons. Laramide to Tertiary deformation and intrusion of felsic plutons have created numerous small mineral deposits that are described in the tables and are shown on the figures in the accompanying text pamphlet. Also included in the pamphlet are numerous chemical analyses of igneous and meta-igneous bodies of all ages in tables and in summary geochemical diagrams. The text pamphlet also contains a detailed description of map units and discussions of the aeromagnetic survey, igneous and metmorphic rocks, and mineral deposits. The printed map sheet and browse graphic pdf file include the aeromagnetic map of the study area, as well as figures and photographs. Purpose: This GIS geologic map database is provided to facilitate the presentation and analysis of earth-science data for this region of Colorado. This digital map database may be displayed at any scale or projection. However, the geologic data in this coverage are not intended for use at a scale other than 1:30,000. Supplemental useful data accompanying the database are extensive geochemical and mineral deposits data, as well as an aeromagnetic map.

IMAP↗

USGS2013

Field calibration and validation of remote-sensing surveys

The Optical Collection Suite (OCS) is a ground-truth sampling system designed to perform in situ measurements that help calibrate and validate optical remote-sensing and swath-sonar surveys for mapping and monitoring coastal ecosystems and ocean planning. The OCS system enables researchers to collect underwater imagery with real-time feedback, measure the spectral response, and quantify the water clarity with simple and relatively inexpensive instruments that can be hand-deployed from a small vessel. This article reviews the design and performance of the system, based on operational and logistical considerations, as well as the data requirements to support a number of coastal science and management projects. The OCS system has been operational since 2009 and has been used in several ground-truth missions that overlapped with airborne lidar bathymetry (ALB), hyperspectral imagery (HSI), and swath-sonar bathymetric surveys in the Gulf of Maine, southwest Alaska, and the US Virgin Islands (USVI). Research projects that have used the system include a comparison of backscatter intensity derived from acoustic (multibeam/interferometric sonars) versus active optical (ALB) sensors, ALB bottom detection, and seafloor characterization using HSI and ALB.

Alaska↗

USGS2005

Did you feel it? : citizens contribute to earthquake science

Since the early 1990s, the magnitude and location of an earthquake have been available within minutes on the Internet. Now, as a result of work by the U.S. Geological Survey and with the cooperation of various regional seismic networks, people who experience an earthquake can go online and share information about its effects to help create a map of shaking intensities and damage. Such “Community Internet Intensity Maps” (CIIMs) contribute greatly toward the quick assessment of the scope of an earthquake emergency and provide valuable data for earthquake research.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2006

JAMSTEC multibeam surveys and submersible dives around the Hawaiian Islands: A collaborative Japan-USA exploration of Hawaii's deep seafloor

This database release, USGS Data Series 171, contains data collected during four Japan-USA collaborative cruises that characterize the seafloor around the Hawaiian Islands. The Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC) sponsored cruises in 1998, 1999, 2001, and 2002, to build a greater understanding of the deep marine geology around the Hawaiian Islands. During these cruises, scientists surveyed over 600,000 square kilometers of the seafloor with a hull-mounted multibeam seafloor-mapping sonar system (SEA BEAM® 2112), observed the seafloor and collected samples using robotic and manned submersible dives, collected dredge and piston-core samples, and performed single-channel seismic surveys.

Hawaii↗

USGS2009

Sedimentation survey of Lago Guerrero, Aguadilla, Puerto Rico, March 2006

Lago Guerrero is located in Aguadilla, northwestern Puerto Rico (fig. 1). The reservoir has a surface area of about 32,000 square meters and is excavated in Aymamon Limestone of Miocene age. This bedrock consists of chalk interbed-ded with solution-riddled hard limestone (Monroe, 1969). The reservoir was constructed in the 1930s as part of the Isabela Hydroelectric System to regulate flows to two hydroelectric plants-Central Isabel No. 2, at an elevation of about 110 meters above mean sea level, and Central Isabel No. 3, at about 55 meters above mean sea level. Hydroelectric power generation was discontinued during the early 1960s, although the exact date is unknown (Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, written commun., 2007). The principal use of the reservoir since then has been to regulate flow to two public-supply water filtration plants and supply irrigation water for the Aguadilla area. Flow into the reservoir is derived from Lago Guajataca through a 26-kilometer-long Canal Principal de Diversion concrete canal (Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, written commun., 2001). Additional inflow occurs on an incidental basis only during intensive rainfall from the immediate drainage area. The present Lago Guerrero drainage area is undetermined, due to the irregular and complex topography of the limestone terrain and anthropogenic modifications to the stormwater drainage system. Stormwater runoff, however, is presumed to be negligible compared to the almost constant inflow to the reservoir of about 59,300 cubic meters per day from Lago Guajataca (CSA Group, 2000). On March 9, 2006, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Caribbean Water Science Center, in cooperation with the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (PREPA), conducted a bathymetric survey of Lago Guerrero to determine the storage capacity of the reservoir and sedimentation amount since a previous survey conducted on May 30, 2001. The March 2006 survey was made to develop a bathymetric map of the reservoir, establish baseline data for future reservoir capacity comparisons, and to estimate the average sedimentation rate over the preceding 5 years.

Puerto Rico↗

USGS2015

Using Landsat imagery to detect, monitor, and project net landscape change

Detailed landscape information is a necessary component to bird habitat conservation planning. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center has been providing information on the Earth’s surface for over 40 years via the continuous series of Landsat satellites. In addition to operating, processing, and disseminating satellite images, EROS is the home to nationwide and global landscape mapping, monitoring, and projection products, including: National Land Cover Database (NLCD) – the definitive land cover dataset for the U.S., with updates occurring at five-year intervals; Global Land Cover Monitoring – producing 30m resolution global land cover; LANDFIRE – Landscape Fire and Resource Management Planning Tools–EROS is a partner in this joint program between U.S. Department of Agriculture and Department of Interior that produces consistent, comprehensive, geospatial data and databases that describe vegetation, wildland fuel, and fire regimes across the U.S.; Land Cover Trends – a landscape monitoring and assessment effort to understand the rates, trends, causes, and consequences of contemporary U.S. land use and land cover change; and Land Use and Land Cover (LULC) Modeling – a project extending contemporary databases of landscape change forward and backward in time through moderate-resolution land cover projections.

All Bird Bulletin↗

USGS1990

Map showing distribution of cadmium and antimony in the nonmagnetic fraction of heavy-mineral concentrates, Richfield 1° x 2° quadrangle, Utah

This map of the Richfield 1° x 2° quadrangle, Utah, shows the regional distribution of cadmium and antimony in the nonmagnetic fraction of drainage-sediment samples. It is part of a folio of maps of the Richfield 1° x 2° quadrangle, Utah, prepared under the Conterminuous United States Mineral Assessment Program. Other published geochemical maps in this folio are listed in the references (this publication). The Richfield quadrangle is located in west-central Utah and includes the eastern part of the Pioche-Marysvale igneous and mineral belt, which extends from the vicinity of Pioche in southeastern Nevada, east-northeastward for 155 miles into central Utah. The western two-thirds of the Richfield quadrangle is part of the Basin and Range province, whereas the eastern third is part of the High Plateaus of Utah, a subprovince of the Colorado Plateau. Bedrock in the northern part of the Richfield quadrangle consists predominantly of Late Proterozoic and Paleozoic sedimentary strata that were thrust eastward during the Sevier orogeny in Cretaceous time onto an autochthon of Mesozoic sedimentary rocks located in the eastern part of the quadrangle. The southern part of the quadrangle is largely underlain by Oligocene and younger volcanic rocks and related intrusions. Extensional tectonism in late Cenozoic time broke the bedrock terrain into a series of north-trending fault blocks; the uplifted mountain areas were eroded to various degrees and the resulting debris was deposited in adjacent basins. Most of the mineral deposits in the Pioche-Marysvale mineral belt were formed as a result of igneous activity in the middle and late Cenozoic time. A more complete description of the geology and a mineral-resource appraisal of the Richfield quadrangle appears in Steven and Morris (1984 and 1987). The regional sampling program was designed to define broad geochemical patterns and trends that can be utilized along with geological and geophysical data to assess the mineral-resource potential for this quadrangle. Reconnaissance geochemical surveys are valuable tools in mineral exploration, especially when used in conjunction with data obtained from other earth science disciplines. Identifying specific exploration targets generally involves additional, more detailed investigations.

Utah↗