Search USGSSearch

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Archival Issues”

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 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

Global cropland-extent product at 30-m resolution (GCEP30) derived from Landsat satellite time-series data for the year 2015 using multiple machine-learning algorithms on Google Earth Engine cloud

Executive Summary Global food and water security analysis and management require precise and accurate global cropland-extent maps. Existing maps have limitations, in that they are (1) mapped using coarse-resolution remote-sensing data, resulting in the lack of precise mapping location of croplands and their accuracies; (2) derived by collecting and collating national statistical data that are often subjective, leading to substantial uncertainties in cropland-area estimates, as well as their locations; and (3) extracted from one or more classes of a land use–land cover product in which cropland classes are not the focus of mapping, leading to their mixing with other classes and creating significant errors of omission and commission. These limitations can be overcome by producing high-resolution cropland-extent maps using satellite-sensor data, such as Landsat 30-m resolution or higher. The most fundamental cropland product is the high-resolution cropland-extent map because all higher level cropland products, such as crop-watering method (that is, whether crops are irrigated or rainfed), crop types, cropping intensities, cropland fallows, crop productivity, and crop-water productivity, are dependent on a precise and accurate cropland-extent product. Given these realities, the overarching goal of this study was to produce a Landsat satellite-derived global cropland-extent product at 30-m resolution. The work, which involved a paradigm shift in how global cropland-extent maps are produced, involved the following five key steps: (1) petabyte-scale computing that involved multiyear, 8- to 16-day, time-series Landsat 30-m resolution data for the global land surface; (2) composition of analysis-ready data (ARD) cubes; (3) creation of a large global-reference data hub for machine learning; (4) use of multiple machine-learning algorithms (MLAs) by writing software and computing in the cloud; and (5) Google Earth Engine (GEE) cloud computing. The five key steps involved nine distinct phases. First, the world was segmented into 74 agroecological zones (AEZs). Second, Landsat 8- to 16-day data were used to time-composite 10-band (blue, green, red, near-infrared, short-wave infrared band 1, short-wave infrared band 2, thermal infrared, enhanced vegetation index, normalized difference water index, and normalized difference vegetation index) Landsat 30-m resolution data cubes for every 2- to 4-month time period during 3- to 4-year periods (stated as nominal-year 2015 or, simply, 2015), along with two additional 30-m resolution bands (Shuttle Radar Topography Mission elevation, and slope) in each of the 74 AEZs. Third, more than 100,000 reference-training data samples were collected using ground data (some of which were collected using a mobile application), as well as submeter- to 5-m-resolution, very high-resolution imagery sourced from other reliable sources. Fourth, reference-training data were used to create a knowledge base for separating cropland from noncropland. Fifth, MLAs such as the pixel-based supervised random forest and support-vector machines were written on the GEE using Python and JavaScript. Sixth, object-based recursive hierarchical segmentation algorithm was used, in addition to MLAs, to overcome uncertainties. Seventh, MLAs used the knowledge base to classify and separate cropland from noncropland. Eighth, accuracy assessment was conducted by generating error matrices for each of the 74 AEZs using 19,171 independent validation-data samples. Ninth, cropland areas were computed for all countries of the world and compared with United Nation’s (UN’s) Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) and other national statistics. The outcome was a Landsat-derived global cropland-extent product at 30-m resolution (GCEP30), which has an overall accuracy of 91.7 percent. For the cropland class, producer’s accuracy was 83.4 percent, and user’s accuracy was 78.3 percent. GCEP30 calculated (using direct pixel count) the global net-cropland area (GNCA) for the year 2015 as 1.873 billion hectares (~12.6 percent of the Earth’s terrestrial area). The continental cropland distribution as a percentage of GNCA was Asia, 33 percent; Europe, 25.5 percent; Africa, 16.7 percent; North America, 14.4 percent; South America, 8.1 percent; and Australia and Oceania, 2.4 percent. The worldwide cropland areas in GCEP30 for 2015 were higher by 236 to 299 million hectares (Mha) compared to national statistics reported elsewhere for the same year (for example, in Food and Agriculture Organization’s corporate statistical database [FAOSTAT] and in the monthly irrigated and rainfed crop areas [MIRCA] database). The global cropland area reported for 2015 increased by 344 Mha (22.5 percent), compared to the year 2000. During the same period (2000–2015), the world’s population increased by 20 percent. Whereas some of these areal increases are real increases in cropland areas, others are due to the types of data, methods, and approaches used. Using the highest known resolution (compared to previous coarse-resolution global products) enabled this study to capture fragmented croplands. Coarse-resolution data compute areas on the basis of subpixels, which, for a large proportion of certain land use–land cover classes, will show only a certain percentage of the total pixel area as actual area. Subpixel areas can lead to substantial uncertainties in area computation, as determining the exact fraction of cropland areas within a coarse-resolution pixel is resource intensive and subject to errors. Other innovations in GCEP30 include reference-data hubs, machine learning, and cloud computing. Cropland areas in 214 countries, territories, departments, and regions were calculated for the year 2015 using GCEP30, on the basis of UN’s global administrative unit layers (GAUL) boundaries. The 10 leading countries in terms of cropland area (as a percentage of the GNCA) were India (9.6 percent), United States (8.95 percent), China (8.82 percent), Russia (8.32 percent), Brazil (3.42 percent), Ukraine (2.32 percent), Canada (2.29 percent), Argentina (2.05 percent), Indonesia (2 percent), and Nigeria (1.91 percent). Together, these 10 countries occupy 50 percent of the global cropland, and they have 52 percent of the global population. Their combined cropland area increased by 2 percent between 2000 and 2015, compared to the substantial increase in population of 517 million (15.5 percent). Together, India, United States, China, and Russia encompass 36 percent of the total area. In the United States and Canada, from 2000 to 2015, cropland decreased by about 2 percent, whereas their populations increased by 14 and 13 percent, respectively. The additional food requirements in these 10 countries, which are caused by increased populations, as well as increasing nutritional demands, are met by production increases in existing cropland or through virtual food trade, or both. More than 18 countries, territories, departments, or regions had 60 percent or more of their geographic area as cropland: Republic of Moldova, San Marino, and Hungary had more than 80 percent of the country’s area as cropland; Denmark, Ukraine, Ireland, and Bangladesh, 70 to 80 percent; and Uruguay, Netherlands, United Kingdom, Spain, Lithuania, Poland, Gaza Strip, Czechia, Italy, India, and Azerbaijan, 60 to 70 percent. Europe and South Asia can be considered agricultural capitals of the world, on the basis of their percentages of geographic area as cropland. United States, China, and Russia, which all have high cropland areas, are ranked second, third, and fourth in the world; India is ranked first. However, the amount of cropland as a percentage of the country’s geographic area is relatively very low for United States (18.3 percent), China (17.7 percent), and Russia (9.5 percent), whereas it is 60.5 percent for India. Most African and South American countries, territories, departments, or regions have less than 15 percent of their geographic area as cropland. China and India together house 36 percent of the world’s population; however, between 2000 and 2015, the amount of China’s cropland area fell by 18.9 percent, owing to urban expansion and the abandonment of farmlands caused by demographic changes (that is, the movement of population from villages to cities). In contrast, China’s population grew by 10 percent. The amount of India’s cropland increased by 8.5 percent, whereas its population grew by 20 percent. This study showed that, out of the 10 leading cropland countries, Ukraine, Nigeria, Russia, and Indonesia showed an 18 to 31 percent increase in cropland areas, on the basis of GCEP30 by the year 2015, compared to 2000. Nigeria’s cropland area increased by 25 percent, and its population increased by 31 percent in the same period. In these countries, food security is maintained by cropland expansion, productivity increases, and virtual food trade. Nevertheless, this trend of increasing net-cropland area and productivity will likely become difficult to maintain, owing to diminishing arable lands and plateauing of 50 years of continual yield increases, requiring policymakers to explore novel and data-supported approaches to solving future food security issues. The GCEP30 product, which can be browsed at full resolution at www.croplands.org , has been released for public download and use through U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)–National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Land Processes Distributed Active Archive Center (see https://lpdaac.usgs.gov/news/release-of-gfsad-30-meter-cropland-extent-products/ ).

Professional Paper

On glaciers

The changes in the sizes of glaciers has for long attracted the attention of glacialists on account of the scientific interest and the development of water‐power from the streams issuing from the glaciers. The International Congress of Geologists, at its Zurich meeting in 1894, appointed a committee, with members from many countries, to collect and publish information bearing on this subject. Annual reports were published in the Archives des Sciences , Geneva, from 1896 to 1906, after which they appeared in the Zeitschrift für Gletscherkunde until the war. It was not until the Prague meeting of the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics in 1927 that a new Commission des Glaciers was appointed, which is about to resume publication.

Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union

Minerals, lands, and geology for the common defence and general welfare, Volume 4, 1939-1961: A history of geology in relation to the development of public-land, federal science, and mapping policies and the development of mineral resources in the United States from the 60th to the 82d year of the U.S. Geological Survey

The fourth volume of the comprehensive history of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is titled “Minerals, Lands, and Geology for the Common Defence and General Welfare—Volume 4, 1939‒1961.” The title is based on a passage in the preamble of the U.S. Constitution. The late Mary C. Rabbitt (1915‒2002), a geophysicist who served with the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey (1948‒1949) and the USGS (1949‒1978), wrote the first three volumes in this series of USGS Special Books. “Volume 1, Before 1879” (1979), “Volume 2, 1879‒1904” (1980), and “Volume 3, 1904‒1939” (1986), although long out of print and out of stock, are now available online; see links at right. The 704-page Volume 4, supplemented by more than 200 illustrations, was begun by Rabbitt and completed by coauthor Clifford M. Nelson, a geologist with the USGS since 1976. The book is described as “A History of Geology in Relation to the Development of Public-Land, Federal Science, and Mapping Policies and the Development of Mineral Resources in the United States From the 60th to the 82d Year of the U.S. Geological Survey.” Volume 4 focuses on the United States and the USGS in war and peace from the beginning of World War II in Europe to the end of the administration of President Dwight D. Eisenhower. Like the earlier books in the series, Volume 4 places the nature and significance of USGS operations in mapping and the earth sciences in the wider contexts of national and international history. The new volume, like its three predecessors, is intended for general readers and historians alike, so it follows a chronological rather than a thematic pattern, although themes are traced throughout the book. After preparing Volumes 1–3, Rabbitt wrote a brief report summarizing the agency's history in its first century, “The United States Geological Survey: 1879‒1989,” which was originally issued as USGS Circular 1050 in 1989. It was reissued in 2000 as part of USGS Circular 1179, which also contains Renée M. Jaussaud’s inventory of documents accessioned through 1997 into Record Group 57 (USGS) at the National Archives and Records Administration’s Archives II facility (NARA II) in College Park, Maryland.

Book

Digital mapping of the Mars Pathfinder landing site: Design, acquisition, and derivation of cartographic products for science applications

The Imager for Mars Pathfinder (IMP) acquired more than 16,000 images and provided panoramic views of the surface of Mars at the Mars Pathfinder landing site in Ares Vallis. This paper describes the stereoscopic, multispectral IMP imaging sequences and focuses on their use for digital mapping of the landing site and for deriving cartographic products to support science applications of these data. Two‐dimensional cartographic processing of IMP data, as performed via techniques and specialized software developed for ISIS (the U.S. Geological Survey image processing software package), is emphasized. Cartographic processing of IMP data includes ingestion, radiometric correction, establishment of geometric control, coregistration of multiple bands, reprojection, and mosaicking. Photogrammetric processing, an integral part of this cartographic work which utilizes the three‐dimensional character of the IMP data, supplements standard processing with geometric control and topographic information [ Kirk et al. , this issue]. Both cartographic and photogrammetric processing are required for producing seamless image mosaics and for coregistering the multispectral IMP data. Final, controlled IMP cartographic products include spectral cubes, panoramic (360° azimuthal coverage) and planimetric (top view) maps, and topographic data, to be archived on four CD‐ROM volumes. Uncontrolled and semicontrolled versions of these products were used to support geologic characterization of the landing site during the nominal and extended missions. Controlled products have allowed determination of the topography of the landing site and environs out to ∼60 m, and these data have been used to unravel the history of large‐ and small‐scale geologic processes which shaped the observed landing site. We conclude by summarizing several lessons learned from cartographic processing of IMP data.

Journal of Geophysical Research E: Planets

National Geochemical Database, U.S. Geological Survey RASS (Rock Analysis Storage System) geochemical data for Alaska

This dataset contains geochemical data for Alaska produced by the analytical laboratories of the Geologic Division of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These data represent analyses of stream-sediment, heavy-mineral-concentrate (derived from stream sediment), soil, and organic material samples. Most of the data comes from mineral resource investigations conducted in the Alaska Mineral Resource Assessment Program (AMRAP). However, some of the data were produced in support of other USGS programs. The data were originally entered into the in-house Rock Analysis Storage System (RASS) database. The RASS database, which contains over 580,000 data records, was used by the Geologic Division from the early 1970's through the late 1980's to archive geochemical data. Much of the data have been previously published in paper copy USGS Open-File Reports by the submitter or the analyst but some of the data have never been published. Over the years, USGS scientists recognized several problems with the database. The two primary issues were location coordinates (either incorrect or lacking) and sample media (not precisely identified). This dataset represents a re-processing of the original RASS data to make the data accessible in digital format and more user friendly. This re-processing consisted of checking the information on sample media and location against the original sample submittal forms, the original analytical reports, and published reports. As necessary, fields were added to the original data to more fully describe the sample preparation methods used and sample medium analyzed. The actual analytical data were not checked in great detail, but obvious errors were corrected.

Alaska

The cartographic lunar reference frame

We describe how lunar cartographic coordinates are currently determined internationally, based on recommendations of the International Astronomical Union (IAU) Working Group on Cartographic Coordinates and Rotational Elements. Currently, a mean Earth/polar axis (ME) system-based frame and ephemeris (JPL DE 421 ME) is used for that purpose. Recently, there has been some discussion that a lunar principal axis system-based frame should be used instead. We describe how that would be a major change to how lunar data are currently acquired, and how data and mapping products are created and archived, searched for, accessed, and used, and our concerns that such a change would cause significant problems. Existing lunar data, data products, papers, and databases could need to be converted, or substantial confusion could result due to the ∼1 km difference between systems, perhaps resulting in navigation or safety issues. The publication and dissemination of any proposal(s) to change systems is encouraged, as are comments on a comparatively much smaller update to the current ME frame proposed here.

Conference Paper

Guidelines for quality assurance and quality control of fish taxonomic data collected as part of the National Water-Quality Assessment Program

Fish community structure is characterized by the U.S. Geological Survey's National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program as part of a perennial, multidisciplinary approach to evaluating the physical, chemical, and biological conditions of the Nation's water resources. The objective of quality assurance and quality control of fish taxonomic data that are collected as part of the NAWQA Program is to establish uniform guidelines and protocols for the identification, processing, and archiving of fish specimens to ensure that accurate and reliable data are collected. Study unit biologists, collaborating with regional biologists and fish taxonomic specialists, prepare a pre-sampling study plan that includes a preliminary faunal list and identification of an ichthyological curation center for receiving preserved fish specimens. Problematic taxonomic issues and protected taxa also are identified in the study plan, and collecting permits are obtained in advance of sampling activities. Taxonomic specialists are selected to identify fish specimens in the field and to assist in determining what fish specimens should be sacrificed, fixed, and preserved for laboratory identification, independent taxonomic verification, and long-term storage in reference or voucher collections. Quantitative and qualitative sampling of fishes follows standard methods previously established for the NAWQA Program. Common ichthyological techniques are used to process samples in the field and prepare fish specimens to be returned to the laboratory or sent to an institutional repository. Taxonomic identifications are reported by using a standardized list of scientific names that provides nomenclatural consistency and uniformity across study units.

Water-Resources Investigations Report

Latency of waveform data delivery from the Southern California Seismic Network during the 2019 Ridgecrest earthquake sequence and its effect on ShakeAlert

The occurrence of the 4–6 July 2019 M w 6.4 and M w 7.1 Ridgecrest earthquake sequence provided the first full‐scale test of the network and telemetry readiness of the Southern California Seismic Network (SCSN), to support the ShakeAlert earthquake early warning (EEW) system in California. ShakeAlert is a U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)‐led collaboration to detect earthquakes and, when possible, to alert the public before the arrival of the strongest shaking. The SCSN performed well in its regional monitoring role for both the 4 July M w 6.4 and the 6 July M w 7.1 earthquakes. In the EEW role, it provided timely delivery of 5 s of P ‐wave data to ShakeAlert, which issued its first alert 6.9 s after origin time. Data delivery at peak data volumes for many stations exhibited some latency, and, as a consequence, some data arrived too late for analysis by one of the EEW algorithms. We find that the average link bandwidth for each station was sufficient, because all waveform data were delivered automatically to the archive, but link capacity for many stations was insufficient for peak demand. We describe the performance of the data telemetry for the sequence, including cellular, radio, hybrid, and backhaul systems. Cellular‐based telemetry systems maintained low latency throughout strong shaking and after, but some stations, even at great distances, experienced subsequent brief increases in latency. Performance of radio links depended mostly on the signal strength of the link, with short‐distance direct shots to high‐bandwidth backhaul systems showing no latency impact, whereas stations on some long distance or marginal quality links suffered latencies of tens or hundreds of seconds. Improvements are being implemented to move telemetry links onto USGS and partner high‐bandwidth microwave systems, and to reduce dependency on less robust long‐distance radio shots.

California

Cloud detection algorithm comparison and validation for operational Landsat data products

Clouds are a pervasive and unavoidable issue in satellite-borne optical imagery. Accurate, well-documented, and automated cloud detection algorithms are necessary to effectively leverage large collections of remotely sensed data. The Landsat project is uniquely suited for comparative validation of cloud assessment algorithms because the modular architecture of the Landsat ground system allows for quick evaluation of new code, and because Landsat has the most comprehensive manual truth masks of any current satellite data archive. Currently, the Landsat Level-1 Product Generation System (LPGS) uses separate algorithms for determining clouds, cirrus clouds, and snow and/or ice probability on a per-pixel basis. With more bands onboard the Landsat 8 Operational Land Imager (OLI)/Thermal Infrared Sensor (TIRS) satellite, and a greater number of cloud masking algorithms, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is replacing the current cloud masking workflow with a more robust algorithm that is capable of working across multiple Landsat sensors with minimal modification. Because of the inherent error from stray light and intermittent data availability of TIRS, these algorithms need to operate both with and without thermal data. In this study, we created a workflow to evaluate cloud and cloud shadow masking algorithms using cloud validation masks manually derived from both Landsat 7 Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus (ETM +) and Landsat 8 OLI/TIRS data. We created a new validation dataset consisting of 96 Landsat 8 scenes, representing different biomes and proportions of cloud cover. We evaluated algorithm performance by overall accuracy, omission error, and commission error for both cloud and cloud shadow. We found that CFMask, C code based on the Function of Mask (Fmask) algorithm, and its confidence bands have the best overall accuracy among the many algorithms tested using our validation data. The Artificial Thermal-Automated Cloud Cover Algorithm (AT-ACCA) is the most accurate nonthermal-based algorithm. We give preference to CFMask for operational cloud and cloud shadow detection, as it is derived from a priori knowledge of physical phenomena and is operable without geographic restriction, making it useful for current and future land imaging missions without having to be retrained in a machine-learning environment.

Remote Sensing of Environment

Joint spatiotemporal models to predict seabird densities at sea

Introduction: Seabirds are abundant, conspicuous members of marine ecosystems worldwide. Synthesis of distribution data compiled over time is required to address regional management issues and understand ecosystem change. Major challenges when estimating seabird densities at sea arise from variability in dispersion of the birds, sampling effort over time and space, and differences in bird detection rates associated with survey vessel type. Methods: Using a novel approach for modeling seabirds at sea, we applied joint dynamic species distribution models (JDSDM) with a vector-autoregressive spatiotemporal framework to survey data collected over nearly five decades and archived in the North Pacific Pelagic Seabird Database. We produced monthly gridded density predictions and abundance estimates for 8 species groups (77% of all birds observed) within Cook Inlet, Alaska. JDSDMs included habitat covariates to inform density predictions in unsampled areas and accounted for changes in observed densities due to differing survey methods and decadal-scale variation in ocean conditions. Results: The best fit model provided a high level of explanatory power (86% of deviance explained). Abundance estimates were reasonably precise, and consistent with limited historical studies. Modeled densities identified seasonal variability in abundance with peak numbers of all species groups in July or August. Seabirds were largely absent from the study region in either fall (e.g., murrelets) or spring (e.g., puffins) months, or both periods (shearwaters). Discussion: Our results indicated that pelagic shearwaters ( Ardenna spp.) and tufted puffin ( Fratercula cirrhata ) have declined over the past four decades and these taxa warrant further investigation into underlying mechanisms explaining these trends. JDSDMs provide a useful tool to estimate seabird distribution and seasonal trends that will facilitate risk assessments and planning in areas affected by human activities such as oil and gas development, shipping, and offshore wind and renewable energy.

Alaska

Clarifications and corrections of the dates of issue of some publications containing descriptions of North American birds

The date of issue of a work containing a new scientific name determines the date the name is available and, therefore, the priority of the name with respect to other applied to the same taxon. Differences between the dates printed in publications and the actual dates of issues often resulted from procedures in distribution and erratic publishing schedules, especially before the twentieth century. Distribution, including that to subscribers, was usually the responsibility of the author (Jackson, 1975: 14-15). Early publications were customarily issues in parts (Price, 1982) and the dated title page was usually issued last, which complicates matters of establishing an actual publication date. Early bibliographic works, especially those of Sherborn (e.g., 1902-1933), Mathews (e.g., 1911, 1919, 1925), Waterhouse (e.g., 1885, 1889, 1937), Zimmer (1926), and Richmond (e.g., 1899b, 1902, 1917), have provided information on the actual dates of issue of many ornithological works. Many modern publications (e.g. American Ornithologists' Union [A.O.U.], 1957, 1983; various volumes of Peters's check-lists) have neglected recent, and some older, bibliographic works on several sources of scientific names of birds that affect the proper citations. Here, we clarify information on the dates of issue of some publications on North American ( sensu , A.O.U., 1983) birds. In the event the actual day of issue cannot be determined, the last day of the month or year, whichever was known, or, lacking such information, the printed date, is the date of availability of the scientific name (International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, 1985: Article 21). Sources for determining the dates of issue include bibliographic works and the invaluable notes of Charles W. Richmond (in the Division of Birds library, Smithsonian Institution). In the following, books are listed alphabetically by the author of the scientific names, and journals by the first word in their title.

Archives of Natural History

National earthquake information center strategic plan, 2019–23

Executive Summary Damaging earthquakes occur regularly around the world; since the turn of the 20th century, hundreds of earthquakes have caused significant loss of life and (or) millions of dollars or more in economic losses. While most of these did not directly affect the United States and its Territories, by studying worldwide seismicity we can better understand how to mitigate the effects of earthquakes when they do occur within U.S. borders. Within the U.S. Government, this mandate falls on the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC), which has the statutory responsibility for monitoring and reporting on earthquakes domestically and globally. The NEIC has been operating since 1966, and throughout its history has been recognized as a world leader for earthquake information. For much of this time, NEIC has been cooperating with a number of regional seismic networks (RSNs) which operate in areas of heightened seismicity in the United States. In 2000, the Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS) was founded as a cooperative umbrella for earthquake-related data collection, analysis, and dissemination in the United States, thereby promoting advanced interoperability between the NEIC and RSN partners. The NEIC also cooperates and coordinates with dozens of global seismic networks. At present (2019), NEIC acquires real-time waveform data from more than 2,000 seismic stations worldwide, contributed from more than 130 seismic networks. Since 2006, the NEIC has operated on a 24-hour, 7-days per week (24/7) basis, and reports on about 30,000 earthquakes per year. Soon after the occurrence of a significant global earthquake, notifications are issued to government representatives, aid agencies, the press, and members of the general public by the Earthquake Notification Service (ENS), electronic feeds, and through the USGS Earthquake Hazards Program (EHP) website. Event-specific web pages provide detailed source parameter information outlining the location and magnitude of the earthquake, including more detailed source characteristics like moment magnitude and focal mechanisms and finite fault solutions. Further, NEIC produces a suite of real-time situational awareness products, including ShakeMap, ShakeCast, Did-You-Feel-It? (DYFI?), and Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquakes for Response (PAGER), to characterize the shaking resulting from the earthquake and the impact it is likely to have on nearby populations and infrastructure. All of these products are ultimately archived in the ANSS Comprehensive Catalog (ComCat), hosted and served by the NEIC. The NEIC also pursues an active research program to improve its ability to characterize earthquakes and understand their hazards. These efforts are all aimed at mitigating the risks of earthquakes to humankind. To maintain its prominent position in earthquake monitoring, the NEIC must continue to evolve, concurrently improving its operations and 24/7 robustness, streamlining services and infrastructure, and keeping pace with research and innovation in the field of seismology. This document outlines how the NEIC might best achieve such goals, by describing specific avenues and opportunities for development in the next five years (2019–23). Several key areas of operational and research focus are identified in this plan as being of the highest importance. First, NEIC must finalize improvements to its regional monitoring capabilities, including the implementation of a variety of improved earthquake detection and association algorithms. One of the most exciting avenues of recent research expansion in earthquake monitoring has involved the use of machine learning; NEIC must explore the benefits of machine learning for improved earthquake detection and source characterization. NEIC also needs to address issues related to the timeliness of earthquake information, exploring the benefits of distributing information as it becomes available, rather than when certain quality criteria are met. To that end, the incorporation of real-time Global Positioning System (GPS) data into the NEIC operational workflow will help improve the speed and accuracy of information for moderate-to-large earthquakes. Finally, NEIC should explore how to further expand and improve the quality and content of the products served during earthquake response efforts, including the generation of new earthquake sequence-specific products, adding an evolutionary component to earthquake information, and continued improvements to earthquake impact products.

Circular

Quality-assurance plan for groundwater activities, U.S. Geological Survey, Washington Water Science Center

This report documents the standard procedures, policies, and field methods used by the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Washington Water Science Center staff for activities related to the collection, processing, analysis, storage, and publication of groundwater data. This groundwater quality-assurance plan changes through time to accommodate new methods and requirements developed by the Washington Water Science Center and the USGS Office of Groundwater. The plan is based largely on requirements and guidelines provided by the USGS Office of Groundwater, or the USGS Water Mission Area. Regular updates to this plan represent an integral part of the quality-assurance process. Because numerous policy memoranda have been issued by the Office of Groundwater since the previous groundwater quality assurance plan was written, this report is a substantial revision of the previous report, supplants it, and contains significant additional policies not covered in the previous report. This updated plan includes information related to the organization and responsibilities of USGS Washington Water Science Center staff, training, safety, project proposal development, project review procedures, data collection activities, data processing activities, report review procedures, and archiving of field data and interpretative information pertaining to groundwater flow models, borehole aquifer tests, and aquifer tests. Important updates from the previous groundwater quality assurance plan include: (1) procedures for documenting and archiving of groundwater flow models; (2) revisions to procedures and policies for the creation of sites in the Groundwater Site Inventory database; (3) adoption of new water-level forms to be used within the USGS Washington Water Science Center; (4) procedures for future creation of borehole geophysics, surface geophysics, and aquifer-test archives; and (5) use of the USGS Multi Optional Network Key Entry System software for entry of routine water-level data collected as part of long-term water-level monitoring networks.

Open-File Report

The planetary data system

In the early 1980s, the Space Science Board (SSB) of the National Research Council was concerned about the poor and inconsistent treatment of scientific information returned from NASA’s space science missions. The SSB formed a panel [The Committee on Data Management and Computation (CODMAC)] to assess the situation and make recommendations to NASA for improvements. The CODMAC panel issued a report [1,2] that led to a number of actions, one of which was the convening of a Planetary Data Workshop in November 1983 [3]. The key findings of that workshop were that (1) important datasets were being irretrievably lost, and (2) the use of planetary data by the wider community is constrained by inaccessibility and a lack of commonality in format and documentation. The report further stated, “Most participants felt the present system (of data archiving and access) is inadequate and immediate changes are necessary to insure retention of and access to these and future datasets.”

Lunar and Planetary Information Bulletin

Vessel surveys for marine birds in the Gulf of America (Gulf of Mexico): Protocol manual (2017–2025)

This manual provides contextual background and detailed instructions for survey procedures that were used to collect, enter, archive, and analyze digitally-entered field data collected for marine birds during three large-vessel survey projects in the northern Gulf of America (also Gulf of Mexico, hereafter “Gulf”). Projects using this protocol included the Gulf of Mexico Marine Assessment Program for Protected Species (GoMMAPPS: 2017-2018), the Vessel Surveys for Abundance and Distribution of Marine Mammals and Seabirds (VSAD: 2023-2024), and certain repositioning legs of the Atlantic Marine Assessment Program for Protected Species (AMAPPS: 2021, 2023). Based substantially on Ballance and Force (2011), the protocol used in the Gulf is based on a standardized 300 m wide strip transect using software architecture available in program SeeBird (v.4.3.7), a data collection program developed by Robert Holland at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Southwest Fisheries Science Center, La Jolla, CA. Survey protocols relied on the digital entering of standardized metadata linked to sightings of seabirds (e.g., species, number, location, distance bin, association[s], behavior, flight direction, flight height, angle from ship, age, sex, plumage, and optional comments) as well as other protected species. SeeBird has additional modules that may be used to input data on mixed-species seabird flocks and flying fish (only the latter was used in the Gulf). SeeBird includes “user-driven” commands issued through the keyboard, touch screen, and/or mouse, many of which are aided by drop-down menus that prompt the user options that are available for input. In addition, the program features “event–driven” inputs updated at intervals selected by the user, and that also record exact time and location of such edits. We describe how SeeBird was adapted in the Gulf both to run directly via serial connections from the ship’s navigation system and to operate independently from the ship through a satellite-derived GPS feed. This user manual also gives information about: procedures used to document flying fish abundance on Gulf surveys; how to use the Beaufort scale for standardizing wind force and sea state environmental conditions; how to make and use a hand-held rangefinder for delimiting strip transect bin distances; additional functionalities in SeeBird for which user guides are not available; file-naming, file-archiving, and file location conventions used on Gulf marine bird surveys; protocols used in the Gulf for describing relative abundance of the macro-alga Sargassum as an environmental covariate; the standardized four-letter taxa codes (summarized in a SpeciesCode.txt file) used in the Gulf for denoting species, other taxonomic, and event categories as inputs to SeeBird; an Excel example spreadsheet that has successfully imported SeeBird’s ASCII text file; procedural steps to import, edit, and archive into Excel ASCII text files from SeeBird; initialization instructions for starting up program SeeBird on a Panasonic ToughBook™ that relies on integrated, satellite-derived GPS, and for writing “S” (seabirds + other taxa) and “E” (flying fish) ASCII files to a folder or subfolder other than the default root location on the laptop that contains program SeeBird; how to trouble-shoot miscellaneous start-up problems with program SeeBird; how to add new four-letter codes (into a SpeciesCode.txt file) when additional taxa or objects of interest are encountered. The primary objective of this manual is to archive a permanent, replicable history of survey methodology to facilitate continuity with comparable future projects that may be conducted in the Gulf. A secondary objective is to describe why and how program SeeBird was applied and adapted specifically for operating in Gulf survey conditions. As of late 2025, user guides for software program SeeBird were no longer readily accessible, so this manual serves also to address that gap.

Northern Gulf of America

Landsat 9: Empowering open science and applications through continuity

The history of Earth observation from space is well reflected through the Landsat program. With data collection beginning with Landsat-1 in 1972, the program has evolved technical capabilities while maintaining continuity of land observations. In so doing, Landsat has provided a critical reference for assessing long-term changes to Earth's land environment due to both natural and human forcing. Poised for launch in mid-2021, the joint NASA-USGS Landsat 9 mission will continue this important data record. In many respects Landsat 9 is a clone of Landsat-8. The Operational Land Imager-2 (OLI-2) is largely identical to Landsat 8 OLI, providing calibrated imagery covering the solar reflected wavelengths. The Thermal Infrared Sensor-2 (TIRS-2) improves upon Landsat 8 TIRS, addressing known issues including stray light incursion and a malfunction of the instrument scene select mirror. In addition, Landsat 9 adds redundancy to TIRS-2, thus upgrading the instrument to a 5-year design life commensurate with other elements of the mission. Initial performance testing of OLI-2 and TIRS-2 indicate that the instruments are of excellent quality and expected to match or improve on Landsat 8 data quality. Landsat-9 will maintain the current data acquisition rate of up to 740 scenes per day, with these scenes available from the Landsat archive at no cost to users. In this communication, we provide background and rationale for the Landsat 9 mission, describe the instrument payloads and ground system, and discuss data products available from the Landsat 9 mission through USGS.

Remote Sensing of Environment

California Historical Intensity Mapping Project (CHIMP): A consistently reinterpreted dataset of seismic intensities for the past 162 years and implications for seismic hazard maps

Historical seismic intensity data are useful for myriad reasons, including assessment of the performance of Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment (PSHA) models and corresponding hazard maps by comparing their predictions to a dataset of historically observed intensities in the region. To assess PSHA models for California, a long and consistently interpreted intensity record is necessary. For this purpose, the California Historical Intensity Mapping Project (CHIMP) has compiled a dataset that combines and reinterprets intensity information that has been stored in disparate and sometimes hard-to-access locations. The CHIMP dataset also includes new observations of intensity from archival research and oral history collection. Version 1 of the dataset includes 46,502 intensity observations for 62 earthquakes with estimated magnitudes ranging from 4.7 to 7.9. The 162 years of shaking data show observed shaking lower than expected from seismic hazard models. This discrepancy is reduced, but persists, if historical intensity data for the largest earthquakes are smoothed to reduce the effects of spatial under-sampling. Possible reasons for this discrepancy include other limitations of the CHIMP dataset, the hazard models, and the possibility that California seismicity throughout the historical period has been lower than the long-term average. Some of these issues may also explain similar discrepancies observed for Italy and Japan.

California

Hydrologic Data for Deep Creek Lake and Selected Tributaries, Garrett County, Maryland, 2007-08

Introduction Recent and ongoing efforts to develop the land in the area around Deep Creek Lake, Garrett County, Maryland, are expected to change the volume of sediment moving toward and into the lake, as well as impact the water quality of the lake and its many tributaries. With increased development, there is an associated increased demand for groundwater and surface-water withdrawals, as well as boat access. Proposed dredging of the lake bottom to improve boat access has raised concerns about the adverse environmental effects such activities would have on the lake. The Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MDDNR) and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) entered into a cooperative study during 2007 and 2008 to address these issues. This study was designed to address several objectives to support MDDNR?s management strategy for Deep Creek Lake. The objectives of this study were to: Determine the current physical shape of the lake through bathymetric surveys; Initiate flow and sediment monitoring of selected tributaries to characterize the stream discharge and sediment load of lake inflows; Determine sedimentation rates using isotope analysis of sediment cores; Characterize the degree of hydraulic connection between the lake and adjacent aquifer systems; and Develop an estimate of water use around Deep Creek Lake. Summary of Activities Data were collected in Deep Creek Lake and in selected tributaries from September 2007 through September 2008. The methods of investigation are presented here and all data have been archived according to USGS policy for future use. The material presented in this report is intended to provide resource managers and policy makers with a broad understanding of the bathymetry, surface water, sedimentation rates, groundwater, and water use in the study area. The report is structured so that the reader can access each topic separately using any hypertext markup (HTML) language reader. In order to establish a base-line water-depth map of Deep Creek Lake, a bathymetric survey of the lake bottom was conducted in 2007. The data collected were used to generate a bathymetric map depicting depth to the lake bottom from a full pool elevation of 2,462 feet (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929). Data were collected along about 90 linear miles across the lake using a fathometer and a differentially corrected global positioning system. As part of a long-term monitoring plan for all surface-water inputs to the lake, streamflow data were collected continuously at two stations constructed on Poland Run and Cherry Creek. The sites were selected to represent areas of the watershed under active development and areas that are relatively stable with respect to development. Twelve months of discharge data are provided for both streams. In addition, five water-quality parameters were collected continuously at the Poland Run station including pH, specific conductance, temperature, dissolved oxygen, and turbidity. Water samples collected at Poland Run were analyzed for sediment concentration, and the results of this analysis were used to estimate the annual sediment load into Deep Creek Lake from Poland Run. To determine sedimentation rates, cores of lake-bottom sediments were collected at 23 locations. Five of the cores were analyzed using a radiometric-dating method, allowing average rates of sedimentation to be estimated for the time periods 1925 to 2008, 1925 to 1963, and 1963 to 2008. Particle-size data from seven cores collected at locations throughout the study area were analyzed to provide information on the amount of fine material in lake-bed sediments. Groundwater levels were monitored continuously in four wells and weekly in nine additional wells during October, November, and December of 2008. Water levels were compared to recorded lake levels and precipitation during the same period to determine the effect of lake-level drawdown and recovery on the adjacent aquifer systems. Water use in the Deep Creek Lake wa

Open-File Report