Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “National Park Service Natural Resource Technical Report”

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

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

27 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
USGS2009

Coastal Circulation and Sediment Dynamics in War-in-the-Pacific National Historical Park, Guam; measurements of waves, currents, temperature, salinity, and turbidity, June 2007-January 2008

Flow in and around coral reefs affects a number of physical, chemical and biologic processes that influence the health and sustainability of coral reef ecosystems. These range from the residence time of sediment and contaminants to nutrient uptake and larval retention and dispersal. As currents approach a coast they diverge to flow around reef structures, causing high horizontal and vertical shear. This can result in either the rapid advection of material in localized jets, or the retention of material in eddies that form in the lee of bathymetric features. The high complexity and diversity both within and between reefs, in conjunction with past technical restrictions, has limited our understanding of the nature of flow and the resulting flux of physical, chemical, and biologic material in these fragile ecosystems. Sediment, nutrients, and other pollutants from a variety of land-based activities adversely impact many coral reef ecosystems in the U.S. and around the world. These pollutants are transported in surface water runoff, groundwater seepage, and atmospheric fallout into coastal waters, and there is compelling evidence that the sources have increased globally as a result of human-induced changes to watersheds. In Guam, and elsewhere on U.S. high islands in the Pacific and Caribbean, significant changes in the drainage basins due to agriculture, feral grazing, fires, and urbanization have in turn altered the character and volume of land-based pollution released to coral reefs. Terrigenous sediment run-off (and the associated nutrients and contaminants often absorbed to it) and deposition on coral reefs are recognized to potentially have significant impact on coral health by blocking light and inhibiting photosynthesis, directly smothering and abrading coral, and triggering increases in macro algae. Studies that combine information on watershed, surface water- and groundwater-flow, transport and fate of sediment and other pollutants in the reef environment, and their impact on reef health and ecology are essential for effective reef management. Two of the main anthropogenic activities along west-central Guam's coastline that may impact the region's coral reef ecosystems include pollution and coastal land use/development, as discussed in the review by Porter and others (2005). The pollution threats include point-sources, such as municipal wastewater (Northern District, Hagatna, Naval Station Guam, and Agat-Santa Rita Waster Water Treatment Plants), cooling water (Tanguisson Steam and Cabras Power Plants), and numerous storm water, ballast water, and tank bottom draw outfalls; nonpoint sources include septic systems, urban runoff, illegal dumping, and groundwater discharges. Poor land-use practices include development without the use of runoff management measures, increased areal extent of impervious surfaces and decreased extent of vegetative barriers, and recreational off-road vehicle use. Furthermore, feral ungulates and illegal wildfires remove protective vegetative cover and generally result in increased soil erosion. While anthropogenic point-sources have been reduced in many areas due to better management practices, nonpoint sources have either stayed constant or increased. Between 1975 and 1999, it is estimated that Guam lost more than a quarter of its tree cover, and more than 750 wildfires each year have resulted in a greater proportion of badlands and other erosion-prone land surfaces with high erosion rates (Forestry and Soil Resources Division, 1999). Approximately 1.8 square kilometers (km2) of Asan Bay, west-central Guam, lies within the National Park Service's (NPS) War-in-the-Pacific National Historical Park's (WAPA) Asan Unit; the bay is the sink for material coming out of the Asan watershed. Anthropogenic modifications of the watersheds adjacent to Asan Bay, which include intentionally-set wildfires, construction, and agriculture (Minton, 2005), are believed to have increased over the past 25

Open-File Report↗
USGS2007

Effects of invasive plant species on pollinator service and reproduction in native plants at Acadia National Park

Invasive plant species can have profound negative effects on natural communities by competively excluding native species. Berberis thunbergii (Japanese barberry), Frangula alnus (glossy or alder buckthorn) and Lythrum salicaria (purple loosestrife) are invasive species known to reduce native plant diversity and are thus of great concern to Acadia National Park. Pollinators visit them for nectar and pollen. The effects of invasive plant species on pollinator behavior were investigated by comparing pollinator visitation to co-flowering native and invasive species with visitation to native species growing alone. The effect of invasives on pollination of native plants was studied by comparing fruit set in patches of the native species growing near invasives with patches far from invasive species in Acadia National Park. The coflowering pairs were as follows: in the spring native Vaccinium angustifolium (lowbush blueberry) was paired with B. thunbergii; in early summer native Viburnum nudum (wild raisin) was paired with F. alnus ; in late summer native Spiraea alba (meadowsweet) was paired with L. salicaria. We investigated whether these invasives competed with native plants for pollinators in Acadia and thus negatively affected native plant reproduction. Our objectives were to determine: 1) the influence, if any, of each invasive on pollinator visitation to a co-flowering native species, 2) factors that might affect visitation, 3) invasive pollen transfer to native plants, and 4) whether invasives influence native plant reproduction (fruit set). Our findings indicate that at times the number of flower visitors to natives was lower or the species composition of visitors different when invasives were present, that invasives sometimes attracted more pollinators, that generally the invasives were more rewarding as far as nectar and pollen availability for pollinators, and that generally native plant fruit set and seed set was not significantly lowered in the presence of the invasive. In fact, in one year fruit set of S. alba was significantly greater in the presence of L. salicaria. The number of invasive pollen grains on native stigmas was extremely low; on average less than one grain per stigma. These fruit set and pollen deposition findings indicate that native plant reproduction was not adversely affected in the short term by these invasive species and that therefore competition between the native and invasive species for pollinators did not occur. Native bee populations monitored in 2004-2005 at sites with and without B. thunbergii and/or F. alnus indicated a greater abundance of native bees at sites with these invasives present. Native bees collected from the native and invasive plants were compared with historical records to assess whether invasive plants favor different bee species than those that formerly predominated on Mount Desert Island. This does not appear to be the case. Several species of bumble bees (Bombus spp.) as well as nine solitary bee species were found that were not documented by the Procter surveys of 1917-1940. Collecting of native bees was limited to the study plants, which may, in part, explain why some bee species documented in the Procter Surveys were not found in the present research. A field guide for identification of native bumble bees has been produced to help Park Natural Resource personnel monitor the status of native bee populations in Acadia. Other educational materials were also developed, aimed at educating Park visitors by exposing them to: 1) the role of native plants and their bee pollinators in terrestrial ecosystems; 2) the effects of invasive plants on native plant-pollinator mutualisms; 3) the need for conserving native bees and other pollinators; and 4) conservation strategies for protecting and enhancing native plant-pollinator mutualisms in the Park. Based on the present findings, Acadia Park Resource Management personnel should continue to closely

Technical Report↗
USGS2007

Recommendations for a barrier island breach management plan for Fire Island National Seashore, including the Otis Pike High Dune Wilderness Area, Long Island, New York

The U.S Army Corps of Engineers, New York District is developing engineering plans, including economic costs and benefits, for storm damage reduction along an 83 mile stretch of the coastal barrier islands and beaches on the south shore of Long Island, NY from Fire Island Inlet east to the Montauk Point headland. The plan, expected to include various alternatives for storm protection and erosion mitigation, is referred to as the Fire Island to Montauk Point Reformulation Plan (FIMP). These plans are expected to follow the Corps of Engineers’ Environmental Operating Principles striving for long term environmental sustainability and balance between environmental protection and protection of human health and property. Fire Island National Seashore (FIIS), a 19,579 acre unit of the National Park System includes a 32 mile long coastal barrier island located within the FIMP project area. A seven-mile section of the park, Otis Pike Fire Island High Dune Wilderness Area, is also a designated Federal Wilderness Area. The FIIS includes not only the barrier island and sand dunes, but also several islands, sand flats and wetlands landward of the barrier, submerged parts of Great South Bay shoreface, extending approximately 4,000 feet into the bay with the inner shelf region extending approximately 1,000 feet seaward of the Fire Island shoreline. The Fire Island barrier islands, a sand-starved system dominated by highly dynamic processes, are struggling to maintain their integrity in the face of sea-level rise and storms. Adding to the dilemma is that development on the barriers and the mainland has increased greatly during the past 50 years. As such, managers and decision makers in federal agencies, state agencies and local governments are challenged to balance tradeoffs between protection of lives and property, public access and long term conservation of natural habitats and processes and the plants and animals that depend on these habitats. National Park Service (NPS) policy stipulates that natural coastal processes be maintained to the greatest extent possible and not be impeded so as to conserve landforms, habitats and natural ecosystem resources that reply on the landforms and processes for long-term sustainability of the national park. Storms and associated processes such as waves, tides, currents and relative sea-level change are critical elements for the formation and evolution of these barrier islands, sand dunes, back-barrier sand flats and lagoons and vegetated wetlands. Processes such as wave run-up, overwash and barrier beaching, which occur during elevated storm surge are all necessary processes in enabling the efficient transfer of sediments, nutrients and marine water from the Atlantic Ocean across barriers and into Great South Bay. A large body of scientific data and information published over the past 50 years shows that such transfers of sediment and water from the ocean to the bays are essential for the long-term maintenance of the barrier island and back-bay systems and their biologically diverse habitats an d ecosystems. Current relative sea-level rise (~12 in/century) is chronic and pervasive in driving Long Island coastal change and with the likelihood of accelerating sea level rise in the near future, coastal hazards such as erosion, inundation, and storm surge flooding will increase, with corresponding increased risk to life and property on both Fire Island and on the mainland. In addition, the cumulative effects over the past century and more, both direct and indirect, of human impacts on the Long Island coast have altered the barrier beach and dunes and sediment transport processes. These impacts have likely increased the potential for breaching and increased risk to life and property on the coast and the mainland. Examples of direct impacts are: the stone jetties at Moriches, Shinnecock, and Fire Island tidal inlets and groin field structures at Westhampton that alter littoral processes, armoring and erosion-control stabilization of the headlandds such as the Montauk Point headlands, and deepening of navigation channels by dredging through the tidal inlets and in the bays. Indirect impacts that have a bearing on decisions to deal with breaching are: high-risk development of the barrier islands and low-lying areas of the mainland vulnerable to flooding, and the dredging of nearshore sand shoals for beach nourishment. The NPS strives to employ a coastal management framework for decision making that is based on assessment of the physical and ecological properties of the shoreline as well as human welfare and property. In order to protect developed areas of Fire Island and the mainland from loss of life, flooding, and other economic and physical damage, the NPS will likely need to consider allowing artificial closure of some breaches within the FIIS under certain circumstances. The decision by the NPS to allow breaches to evolve naturally and possibly close or to allow artificially closing breaches is based on four criteria: 1. Volumes of sediment transported landward and exchange of water and nutrients; 2. Elevated water levels and flooding risk to mainland life and property; 3. Engineering processes of artificial closure; and 4. Economic costs and benefits of artificial closure. This report for breach management presents protocols which specify when breach closures within the FIIS might be desirable and necessary, as well as provides recommendations for structural breach closure engineering operations which are indented to minimize negative impacts to the natural wilderness values and cultural resources within the FIIS, particularly the Otis Pike Wilderness Area. The goal of the plan is to strike a balance between protecting natural resources and allowing natural processes to operate and avoiding loss of life and excessive property damage.

New York↗
USGS2022

Adaptive management framework and decision support tool for invasive annual bromes in seven Northern Great Plains National Park Service units

National Park Service (NPS) units in the northern Great Plains (NGP) were established to preserve and interpret the history of the United States, protect and showcase unusual geology and paleontology, and provide a home for vanishing large wildlife. A unifying feature among these national parks, monuments, and historic sites is northern mixed-grass prairie, which not only provides background scenery and habitat but is the foundation of many park missions. As recognition of the prairie’s importance to park fundamental resources and values has grown, so too has the realization that invasive plants threaten these values by reducing native species diversity, altering food webs, and marring the visitor experience. Cheatgrass ( Bromus tectorum ) and Japanese brome ( Bromus japonicus )—collectively referred to as “annual bromes”—are of particular concern because of their documented increase through time, and their association with lower native plant diversity, in NGP parks. A variety of grazing, herbicide-application, and prescribed-fire experiments have shown promising short-term results for controlling annual bromes in research-scale plots in the NGP, but it is unclear whether these management actions will be as effective at the larger spatial and longer temporal scales relevant to park management. When uncertainties about the effectiveness of different management actions cannot be answered with traditional research approaches in time to prevent resource degradation, yet recurrent management decisions must be made, an adaptive management approach may be appropriate. Thus, in 2017, we began to develop the ABAM—Annual Brome Adaptive Management—framework. The aim of this framework is to reduce uncertainties about methods for controlling annual bromes in seven NGP parks through a formal process of learning from the application of on-going management. A uniform framework across seven parks provides greater opportunities for reducing these uncertainties compared to a single park acting alone or to multiple parks using different adaptive management frameworks. This technical report details the development and expected implementation of the ABAM framework. After briefly introducing the issue (Section 1) and describing the context in which the framework was developed (Section 2), the report describes how a structured decision-making process was used to frame the problem, determine concrete objectives, and decide the alternative actions for achieving those objectives that the framework would be designed around (Section 3). Then the report describes the process used to develop the ABAM decision support system (Section 4). At the core of this system is the ABAM decision support tool, a Bayesian decision network built on nearly two decades of vegetation monitoring data from NGP parks, as well as current literature and ABAMspecific experiments. This tool, referred to as the ABAM model by its intended users, is built to work with the existing vegetation monitoring, prescribed fire, and invasive plant management programs that support the seven ABAM parks. In Section 5, the report describes how output from the ABAM model is produced and used in annual vegetation management decision making. It describes the ABAM R package (Baldwin et al. 2021) and an example R script that leads a user through an annual workflow using the model and the package. This workflow updates the model with information from new monitoring events following management actions of prescribed fire, herbicide application, or a combination thereof. With the updated model, data describing the current condition of vegetation in park management units, and current data for environmental factors included in the model (soil texture, slope, weather, and grazing), the user then runs the model to predict future vegetation conditions—and managers’ happiness with the outcome—in response to each of 10 management actions for each management unit in each park. These predictions inform managers’ decisions regarding locations and types of management actions to apply in the upcoming year. The ABAM framework is in its infancy, and the report concludes (Section 6) with a discussion of its longer-term viability. Successful adaptive management requires commitment for the long term, likely decades. Currently, the predictions of the decision support tool are not expected to be highly accurate, but they ideally will improve over time as more management actions are applied and their outcomes are captured by monitoring. We designed the ABAM decision support tool to work with the existing management and monitoring resources in ABAM parks to maximize the sustainability of the model’s use, but the ABAM framework requires more than the model. Because this application of an adaptive management framework supported by a quantitative decision support tool to guide vegetation management is unique within the NPS (to our knowledge), institutional knowledge and mechanisms for long-term implementation of the ABAM framework do not exist within the agency. Additionally, the ABAM model and the data that inform it could be improved in a variety of ways. Thus, this report concludes with a discussion of ways to both sustain and improve upon the work completed so far.

Montana, Nebraska, South Dakota, Wyoming↗
USGS2013

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program, Cuyahoga Valley National Park, Ohio

The National Park Service (NPS) Vegetation Inventory Program (VIP) is an effort to classify, describe, and map existing vegetation of national park units for the NPS Natural Resource Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) Program. The NPS VIP is managed by the NPS Biological Resources Management Division and provides baseline vegetation information to the NPS Natural Resource I&M Program. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Vegetation Characterization Program lends a cooperative role in the NPS VIP. The USGS Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center, NatureServe, and NPS Cuyahoga Valley National Park (CUVA) have completed vegetation classification and mapping of CUVA. Mappers, ecologists, and botanists collaborated to identify and describe vegetation types within the National Vegetation Classification Standard (NVCS) and to determine how best to map them by using aerial imagery. The team collected data from 221 vegetation plots within CUVA to develop detailed descriptions of vegetation types. Data from 50 verification sites were also collected to test both the key to vegetation types and the application of vegetation types to a sample set of map polygons. Furthermore, data from 647 accuracy assessment (AA) sites were collected (of which 643 were used to test accuracy of the vegetation map layer). These data sets led to the identification of 45 vegetation types at the association level in the NVCS at CUVA. A total of 44 map classes were developed to map the vegetation and general land cover of CUVA, including the following: 29 map classes represent natural/semi-natural vegetation types in the NVCS, 12 map classes represent cultural vegetation (agricultural and developed) in the NVCS, and 3 map classes represent non-vegetation features (open-water bodies). Features were interpreted from viewing color-infrared digital aerial imagery dated October 2010 (during peak leaf-phenology change of trees) via digital onscreen three-dimensional stereoscopic workflow systems in geographic information systems (GIS). The interpreted data were digitally and spatially referenced, thus making the spatial database layers usable in GIS. Polygon units were mapped to either a 0.5 ha or 0.25 ha minimum mapping unit, depending on vegetation type. A geodatabase containing various feature-class layers and tables shows the locations of vegetation types and general land cover (vegetation map), vegetation plot samples, verification sites, AA sites, project boundary extent, and aerial photographic centers. The feature-class layer and relate tables for the CUVA vegetation map provides 4,640 polygons of detailed attribute data covering 13,288.4 ha, with an average polygon size of 2.9 ha. Summary reports generated from the vegetation map layer show map classes representing natural/semi-natural types in the NVCS apply to 4,151 polygons (89.4% of polygons) and cover 11,225.0 ha (84.5%) of the map extent. Of these polygons, the map layer shows CUVA to be 74.4% forest (9,888.8 ha), 2.5% shrubland (329.7 ha), and 7.6% herbaceous vegetation cover (1,006.5 ha). Map classes representing cultural types in the NVCS apply to 435 polygons (9.4% of polygons) and cover 1,825.7 ha (13.7%) of the map extent. Map classes representing non-NVCS units (open water) apply to 54 polygons (1.2% of polygons) and cover 237.7 ha (1.8%) of the map extent. A thematic AA study was conducted of map classes representing natural/semi-natural types in the NVCS. Results present an overall accuracy of 80.7% (kappa index of 79.5%) based on data from 643 of the 647 AA sites. Most individual map-class themes exceed the NPS VIP standard of 80% with a 90% confidence interval. The CUVA vegetation mapping project delivers many geospatial and vegetation data products in hardcopy and/or digital formats. These products consist of an in-depth project report discussing methods and results, which include descriptions and a dichotomous key to vegetation types, map classification and map-class descriptions, and a contingency table showing AA results. The suite of products also includes a database of vegetation plots, verification sites, and AA sites; digital pictures of field sites; field data sheets; aerial photographic imagery; hardcopy and digital maps; and a geodatabase of vegetation types and land cover (map layer), fieldwork locations (vegetation plots, verification sites, and AA sites), aerial photographic index, project boundary, and metadata. All geospatial products are projected in Universal Transverse Mercator, Zone 17, by using the North American Datum of 1983. Information on the NPS VIP and completed park mapping projects are located on the Internet at <http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/inventory/veg> and <http://www.usgs.gov/core_science_systems/csas/vip/index.html>.

Natural Resource Technical Report↗
USGS2017

U.S. Geological Survey Karst Interest Group Proceedings, San Antonio, Texas, May 16–18, 2017

Introduction and Acknowledgments Karst aquifer systems are present throughout parts of the United States and some of its territories, and have developed in carbonate rocks (primarily limestone and dolomite) and evaporites (gypsum, anhydrite, and halite) that span an interval of time encompassing more than 550 million years. The depositional environments, diagenetic processes, post-depositional tectonic events, and geochemical weathering processes that form karst aquifers are varied and complex. These factors involve biological, chemical, and physical changes that when combined with the diverse climatic regimes in which karst development has taken place, result in the unique dual- or triple-porosity nature of karst aquifers. These complex hydrogeologic systems typically represent challenging and unique conditions to scientists attempting to study groundwater flow and contaminant transport in these terrains. The dissolution of carbonate rocks and the subsequent development of distinct and beautiful landscapes, caverns, and springs have resulted in the most exceptional karst areas being designated as national or state parks. Tens of thousands of similar areas in the United States have been developed into commercial caverns and known privately owned caves. Both public and private properties provide access for scientists to study the flow of groundwater in situ . Likewise, the range and complexity of landforms and groundwater flow systems associated with karst terrains are enormous, perhaps more than for any other aquifer type. Karst aquifers and landscapes that form in tropical areas, such as the cockpit karst along the north coast of Puerto Rico, differ greatly from karst landforms in more arid climates, such as the Edwards Plateau in west-central Texas or the Guadalupe Mountains near Carlsbad, New Mexico, where hypogenic processes have played a major role in speleogenesis. Many of these public and private lands also contain unique flora and fauna associated with these karst hydrogeologic systems. As a result, numerous federal, state, and local agencies have a strong interest in the study of karst terrains. Many of the major springs and aquifers in the United States have developed in carbonate rocks, such as the Floridan aquifer system in Florida and parts of Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina; the Ozark Plateaus aquifer system in parts of Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma; and the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system in west-central Texas. These aquifers, and the springs that discharge from them, serve as major water-supply sources and form unique ecological habitats. Competition for the water resources of karst aquifers is common, and urban development and the lack of attenuation of contaminants in karst areas due to dissolution features that form direct pathways into karst aquifers can impact the ecosystem and water quality associated with these aquifers. The concept for developing a platform for interaction among scientists within the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) working on karst-related studies evolved from the November 1999 National Groundwater Meeting of the USGS. As a result, the Karst Interest Group (KIG) was formed in 2000. The KIG is a loose-knit, grass-roots organization of USGS and non-USGS scientists and researchers devoted to fostering better communication among scientists working on, or interested in, karst science. The primary mission of the KIG is to encourage and support interdisciplinary collaboration and technology transfer among scientists working in karst areas. Additionally, the KIG encourages collaborative studies between the different mission areas of the USGS as well as with other federal and state agencies, and with researchers from academia and institutes. To accomplish its mission, the KIG has organized a series of workshops that have been held near nationally important karst areas. To date (2017) seven KIG workshops, including the workshop documented in this report, have been held. The workshops typically include oral and poster sessions on selected karst-related topics and research, as well as field trips to local karst areas. To increase non-USGS participation an effort was made for the workshops to be held at a university or institute beginning with the fourth workshop. Proceedings of the workshops are published by the USGS and are available online at the USGS publications warehouse https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/ by using the search term “karst interest group.” The first KIG workshop was held in St. Petersburg, Florida, in 2001, in the vicinity of the large springs and other karst features of the Floridan aquifer system. The second KIG workshop was held in 2002, in Shepherdstown, West Virginia, in proximity to the carbonate aquifers of the northern Shenandoah Valley, and highlighted an invited presentation on karst literature by the late Barry F. Beck of P.E. LaMoreaux and Associates. The third KIG workshop was held in 2005, in Rapid City, South Dakota, near evaporite karst features in limestones of the Madison Group in the Black Hills of South Dakota. The Rapid City KIG workshop included field trips to Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, and featured a presentation by Thomas Casadevall, then USGS Central Region Director, on the status of Earth science at the USGS. The fourth KIG workshop in 2008 was hosted by the Hoffman Environmental Research Institute and Center for Cave and Karst Studies at Western Kentucky University in Bowling Green, Kentucky, near Mammoth Cave National Park and karst features of the Chester Upland and Pennyroyal Plateau. The workshop featured a late-night field trip into Mammoth Cave led by Rickard Toomey and Rick Olsen, National Park Service. The fifth KIG workshop in 2011 was a joint meeting of the USGS KIG and University of Arkansas HydroDays, hosted by the Department of Geosciences at the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville. The workshop featured an outstanding field trip to the unique karst terrain along the Buffalo National River in the southern Ozarks, and a keynote presentation on paleokarst in the United States was delivered by Art and Peggy Palmer. The sixth KIG workshop was hosted by the National Cave and Karst Research Institute (NCKRI) in 2014, in Carlsbad, New Mexico. George Veni, Director of the NCKRI, served as a co-chair of the workshop with Eve Kuniansky of the USGS. The workshop featured speaker Dr. Penelope Boston, Director of Cave and Karst Studies at New Mexico Tech, Socorro, and Academic Director at the NCKRI, who addressed the future of karst research. The field trip on evaporite karst of the lower Pecos Valley was led by Lewis Land (NCKRI karst hydrologist), and the field trip on the geology of Carlsbad Caverns National Park was led by George Veni. This current seventh KIG workshop is being held in San Antonio at the University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA). This 2017 workshop is being hosted by the Department of Geological Sciences’ Student Geological Society (SGS), and student chapters of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG) and Association of Engineering Geologists (AEG), with support by the UTSA Department of Geological Sciences and Center for Water Research. The UTSA student chapter presidents, Jose Silvestre (SGS), John Cooper (AAPG), and Tyler Mead (AEG) serve as co-chairs of the 2017 workshop with Eve Kuniansky of the USGS. The technical session committee is chaired by Eve Kuniansky, USGS, and includes Michael Bradley, Tom Byl, Rebecca Lambert, John Lane, and James Kaufmann, all USGS, and Patrick Tucci, retired USGS. The logistics committee includes Amy Clark, Yongli Gao, and Lance Lambert (Department Chair), UTSA Department of Geological Sciences; and Ryan Banta and Allan Clark, USGS, San Antonio, Texas. The field trip committee is chaired by Allan Clark and includes Amy Clark, Yongli Gao, and Keith Muehlestein, UTSA; Marcus Gary, Edwards Aquifer Authority and University of Texas at Austin; Ron Green, Southwest Research Institute; Geary Schindel, Edwards Aquifer Authority; and George Veni, NCKRI. Additionally, two organizations have assisted the UTSA student chapters in hosting the meeting by donating funds to the chapters: the Edwards Aquifer Authority, San Antonio, Texas, and the Barton Springs Edwards Aquifer Authority, Austin, Texas. Additionally, Yongli Gao, Center for Water Research and Department of Geological Sciences, UTSA, helped develop sessions on cave and karst research in China for this workshop. These proceedings could not have been accomplished without the assistance of Lawrence E. Spangler as co-editor who not only has subject matter expertise, but also serves as an editor with the USGS Science Publishing Network. We sincerely hope that this workshop continues to promote future collaboration among scientists of varied and diverse backgrounds, and improves our understanding of karst aquifer systems in the United States and its territories. The extended abstracts of USGS authors were peer reviewed and approved for publication by the USGS. Articles submitted by university researchers and other federal and state agencies did not go through the formal USGS peer review and approval process, and therefore may not adhere to USGS editorial standards or stratigraphic nomenclature. However, all articles had a minimum of two peer reviews and were edited for consistency of appearance in the proceedings. The use of trade, firm or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. The USGS Water Availability and Use Science Program funded the publication costs of the proceedings.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2014

U.S. Geological Survey Karst Interest Group Proceedings, Carlsbad, New Mexico, April 29-May 2, 2014

Karst aquifer systems are present throughout parts of the United States and some of its territories, and have developed in carbonate rocks (primarily limestone and dolomite) that span an interval of time encompassing more than 550 million years. The depositional environments, diagenetic processes, post-depositional tectonic events, and geochemical weathering processes that form karst aquifers are varied and complex, and involve biological, chemical, and physical changes. These factors, combined with the diverse climatic regimes under which karst development in these rocks has taken place, result in the unique dual- or triple-porosity nature of karst aquifers. These complex hydrogeologic systems typically represent challenging and unique conditions to scientists attempting to study groundwater flow and contaminant transport in these terrains. The dissolution of carbonate rocks and the subsequent development of distinct and beautiful landscapes, caverns, and springs has resulted in the most exceptional karst areas of the United States being designated as national or state parks; commercial caverns and known privately owned caves number in the tens of thousands. Both public and private properties provide access for scientists to study the flow of groundwater in situ. Likewise, the range and complexity of landforms and groundwater flow systems associated with karst terrains are enormous, perhaps more than for any other aquifer type. Karst aquifers and landscapes that form in tropical areas, such as the cockpit karst along the north coast of Puerto Rico, differ greatly from karst landforms in more arid climates, such as the Edwards Plateau in west-central Texas or the Guadalupe Mountains near Carlsbad, New Mexico, where hypogenic processes have played a major role in speleogenesis. Many of these public and private lands also contain unique flora and fauna associated with these karst hydrogeologic systems. As a result, numerous federal, state, and local agencies have a strong interest in the study of karst terrains. Many of the major springs and aquifers in the United States have developed in carbonate rocks, such as the Floridan aquifer system in Florida and parts of Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina; the Ozark Plateaus aquifer system in parts of Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma; and the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system in west-central Texas. These aquifers, and the springs that discharge from them, serve as major water-supply sources and as unique ecological habitats. Competition for the water resources of karst aquifers is common, and urban development and the lack of attenuation of contaminants in karst areas can impact the ecosystem and water quality of these aquifers. The concept for developing a platform for interaction among scientists within the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) working on karst-related studies evolved from the November 1999 National Ground-Water Meeting of the USGS. As a result, the Karst Interest Group (KIG) was formed in 2000. The KIG is a loose-knit, grass-roots organization of USGS and non-USGS scientists and researchers devoted to fostering better communication among scientists working on, or interested in, karst science. The primary mission of the KIG is to encourage and support interdisciplinary collaboration and technology transfer among scientists working in karst areas. Additionally, the KIG encourages collaborative studies between the different mission areas of the USGS as well as other federal and state agencies, and with researchers from academia and institutes. The KIG also encourages younger scientists by participation of students in the poster and oral sessions. To accomplish its mission, the KIG has organized a series of workshops that are held near nationally important karst areas. To date (2014) six KIG workshops, including the workshop documented in this report, have been held. The workshops typically include oral and poster sessions on selected karst-related topics and research, as well as field trips to local karst features. Proceedings of the workshops are published by the USGS and are available online at http://water.usgs.gov/ogw/karst/kig . The first KIG workshop was held in St. Petersburg, Florida, February 13–16, 2001, in the vicinity of the large springs and other karst features of the Floridan aquifer system. The second KIG workshop was held August 20–22, 2002, in Shepherdstown, West Virginia, in proximity to the carbonate aquifers of the northern Shenandoah Valley and highlighted an invited presentation on karst literature by the late Barry F. Beck of P.E. LaMoreaux and Associates. The third KIG workshop was held September 12–15, 2005, in Rapid City, South Dakota, nearby to karst features in evaporites and limestones of the Madison Group in the Black Hills of South Dakota, including Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument. The workshop also included a featured presentation by Thomas Casadevall, Central Region Director, USGS, on the status of earth science at the USGS and evening trips to Jewel Cave led by Mike Wiles, National Park Service (NPS) and Wind Cave led by Rod Horrocks, NPS. The fourth KIG workshop was held May 27–29, 2008, and hosted by the Hoffman Environmental Research Institute and Center for Cave and Karst Studies at Western Kentucky University in Bowling Green, Kentucky, near Mammoth Cave National Park and karst features of the Chester Upland and Pennyroyal Plateau. The workshop featured a late-night field trip into Mammoth Cave with Rickard Toomey and Rick Olsen, NPS. The fifth workshop was held April 26–29, 2011, and was a joint meeting of the USGS KIG and University of Arkansas HydroDays, hosted by the Department of Geosciences at the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville. The workshop featured an outstanding field trip to the unique karst terrain along the Buffalo National River of the southern Ozarks and a keynote presentation on paleokarst in the United States by Art and Peggy Palmer. This sixth and current 2014 KIG workshop is hosted by the National Cave and Karst Research Institute (NCKRI) in Carlsbad, New Mexico, with Director of NCKRI, George Veni, serving as co-chair of the workshop with Eve Kuniansky, USGS. The session planning committee for this sixth workshop includes Van Brahana, USGS retired and University of Arkansas Professor Emeritus; Tom Byl, USGS and Tennessee State University; Zelda Bailey, former Director of NCKRI and retired Director, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Boulder Laboratory, Colorado; Patrick Tucci, USGS retired; and Mike Bradley, Allan Clark, Geoff Delin, Daniel Doctor, James Kaufmann, Eve Kuniansky, Randy Orndorff, Larry Spangler, and Dave Weary of the USGS. The karst hydrology field trip on Thursday will be led by Lewis Land (NCKRI karst hydrologist) and the optional Friday field trip on the geology of Carlsbad Caverns National Park will be led by George Veni. The keynote speaker is Dr. Penelope Boston, Director of Cave and Karst Studies at New Mexico Tech, Socorro, and Academic Director at NCKRI, who will address the future of karst research. Additionally, there is a featured presentation “Irish karst and its management,” by Caoimhe Hickey, The Geological Survey of Ireland, preceding a panel discussion on “Collaboration During Times of Limited Resources.” The extended abstracts of USGS authors were peer reviewed and approved for publication by the U.S. Geological Survey. Articles submitted by university researchers and other federal and state agencies did not go through the formal USGS peer review and approval process, and therefore may not adhere to our editorial standards or stratigraphic nomenclature and is not research conducted or data collected by the USGS. However, all articles had at a minimum of two peer reviews, and all articles were edited for consistency of appearance in the published Proceedings. The use of trade, firm or product names in any article is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. The USGS, Office of Groundwater, provides technical support for the Karst Interest Group website and public availability of the Proceedings from these workshops, and the USGS Groundwater Resources Program funds the publication costs. Finally, the cover illustration is the work of Ann Tihansky, USGS, used since the first KIG workshop in 2000.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2024

Analysis and review of fishery-dependent data for Hawaiian nearshore noncommercial fisheries

Noncommercial, shore-based fisheries provide economic, social, and cultural services to communities throughout the Hawaiian Islands. The State of Hawai‘i Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), Division of Aquatic Resources (DAR) routinely conducts surveys to monitor noncommercial fisheries such that estimates of fishing effort and catch by gear type can be generated and used to implement more sustainable management practices. DAR executes both the Hawai‘i Marine Recreational Fishery Survey (HMRFS), a nationally standardized survey that focuses on intercepting fishers at access points (i.e., boat ramps) across the main Hawaiian Islands, and a set of roving creel surveys on O‘ahu, Maui Nui, and Kaua‘i that observe and intercept fishers at locations along the shoreline outside of those targeted by HMRFS. The latter set of creel surveys were designed to complement HMRFS by expanding its geographic coverage and thus providing a more representative picture of noncommercial fishing in Hawai‘i. Sustainable management priorities set by DAR rely on the availability of statewide, fishery- dependent data. Thus, we collate information from island-based roving creel surveys into a cohesive Statewide Creel Survey Database. Further, we provide preliminary analyses and describe ways that surveys could be streamlined to improve future data collection, analysis, and utility. In so doing, we synthesize the most detailed information to-date about noncommercial shore-based fisheries of Hawai‘i. The unprecedented spatial and temporal coverage of DAR’s dataset reveals the value of their survey efforts over the last decade to address fishery management needs. Our primary objectives, results, and conclusions are summarized below: 1) Integrate DAR roving creel survey data from different islands into a single Statewide Creel Survey Dataset (Chapter II). We describe the collation of creel survey data from O‘ahu, Maui Nui, and Kaua‘i into a statewide dataset. We also offer ways in which these surveys could be streamlined to meet the needs of managers and decision makers. Briefly, these are to create a statewide strategic plan, standardize the execution of standard operating procedures, centralize the creel survey database and associated metadata, and consider using technology that improves the data pipeline, including transitioning from paper-based to electronic systems for data entry and processing. 2) Assess whether the new Statewide Creel Survey Dataset can provide inputs for length-based stock assessments (Chapter III). Only on Maui were interviews conducted with associated catch data. There was reasonably high taxonomic coverage (42 species from 186 interviews with 310 fishers), but low sample sizes for nearly all species precluded the development of length-based stock assessments. We provide summary statistics from the existing data and briefly discuss how technologies could be used to automate analysis of images of noncommercial catch. 3) Analyze the Statewide Creel Survey Dataset for spatial and temporal patterns in fishing effort (Chapter IV): a. Visualizing noncommercial fishing pressure . We found that fishing effort (mean number of fishers observed per survey event at a site) on O'ahu was over three times greater than that recorded during similar surveys conducted on Maui or Kaua'i. We create maps that display the distribution of angling and spearfishing effort around each of the three islands. b. Factors that predict fishing “hotspots” around Maui . Fishing effort on Maui was associated with areas with more wave power and less parking availability. There were half as many fishers in areas with parking lots than in areas with parking on the road shoulder only. c. Changes in fishing effort during the COVID-19 pandemic . There was no change in fishing effort on O‘ahu during the first year of the pandemic, but there was a 20% decline in year 2 and a 33% decline in year 3, both in comparison to pre-pandemic levels. Pre-pandemic creel survey data were unavailable for Maui and Kaua‘i, but fishing effort on these islands also declined as the pandemic progressed at similar or greater rates than those observed on O‘ahu. 4) Quantify potential bias in survey methods by experimentally deriving fisher detection probabilities of shore-based and drone-based surveys (Chapter V): a. Shore-based surveys . We conducted roving creel surveys for four months at three locations around Hilo Bay, designed to emulate and estimate the efficacy of DAR standard operating procedures. There was high agreement between paired observers in counting fishers, leading to near-perfect detection probabilities of both anglers (94%) and spearfishers (97%), but relatively low agreement and detection probabilities of other fishers (throw net, ‘opihi picking, etc.) (52%). b. Drone-based surveys . We used an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV; operated by DAR staff) to collect imagery of fishers along the Hilo Bay shoreline. We used still images and video clips (with known fishing activity) to build an online survey that was distributed to DAR and HCFRU personnel, asking them to count and categorize resource users as a snorkeler, spearfisher, angler, or other fisher. Only 40.0% of the responses correctly counted and categorized resource users in the image. Anglers were correctly identified and enumerated in 90.0% of the responses, but the correct response rates of the other three user categories ranged from 67.8% – 79.4%. Snorkelers and anglers tended to be undercounted while spearfishers and other fishers were overcounted. 5) Review the potential for incorporating emerging technologies that will improve, augment, and evolve creel survey data collection, especially for spearfishing (Chapter VI). Within the context of monitoring shore-based noncommercial fishing, we review the use of electronic data entry/processing systems with geospatial and image capabilities, field cameras, drones, smart buoys, citizen science apps, data mining social media, artificial intelligence and machine learning. We highlight several of the challenges and considerations when implementing these technologies into creel surveys and provide a synthesis of options that could be used to better estimate spearfishing. The general conclusion of this assessment is that the DAR roving creel survey program is collecting valuable data that supplement the existing HMRFS efforts. However, there are a number of areas that could be improved to make these efforts a more effective tool for decision-making processes in resource management and conservation: 1) Establishment of clear statewide and island objectives for the Statewide Creel Survey Dataset. Currently, data collection efforts are focused towards addressing a very broad purpose – supplementing the HMRFS data collection efforts. However, the results of the preliminary analyses conducted as part of this project suggest that the data could be used to address other areas of need if these objectives were clearly defined. Further, the design of the creel survey would benefit from greater standardization of survey protocols between islands and an effort to define a) the acceptable margins of error associated with the estimates generated by these data and b) the minimum level of change that the surveys would need to detect to be useful to managers. 2) Centralization of data entry, data quality assessment, and data accessibility. Currently, each DAR office manages data entry, checks the data for errors, and is responsible for managing and storing the data. Instituting a centralized data entry system, particularly an online database that can receive survey data from tablets or smartphones running a standardized data collection application would improve efficiency, reduce data entry errors, and accelerate the availability of data to managers. A substantial amount of time and effort from the project described in this report was devoted to checking the dataset for errors. The development and application of data quality assurance protocols would ensure that the data are reliable and available in a timely fashion to support management decisions. 3) Address lingering questions regarding the efficacy of current survey protocols to capture and characterize the spearfishing component of the noncommercial fishery. The results presented in the report suggest that the current creel survey protocols do a good job detecting spearfishers when present but are not capturing sufficient data about their catch or total effort. There are also questions remaining as to whether the survey times and sites are sufficiently capturing the behavior of spearfishers in Hawai‘i. A more thorough assessment – whether through additional research, alteration of survey design, or review of data by representatives of the spearfishing community – would provide insight on how to use the Statewide Creel Survey Database to inform management of spearfishing. 4) Investigate the integration of technological advancements into the creel survey methods. As priorities and needs are developed and formalized, it would be valuable to consider how various technological advancements might enhance and streamline data collection or open new avenues of inquiry.

Hawaii↗
USGS2014

Status of whitebarkpine in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem: A step-trend analysis comparing 2004-2007 to 2008-2011

Whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) is a foundation and keystone species in upper subalpine environments of the northern Rocky Mountains that strongly influences the biodiversity and productivity of high-elevation ecosystems (Tomback et al. 2001, Ellison et al. 2005). Throughout its historic range, whitebark pine has decreased significantly as a major component of high-elevation forests. As a result, it is critical to understand the challenges to whitebark pine—not only at the tree and stand level, but also as these factors influence the distribution of whitebark pine across the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE). In 2003, the National Park Service (NPS) Greater Yellowstone Inventory & Monitoring Network identified whitebark pine as one of twelve significant natural resource indicators or vital signs to monitor (Jean et al. 2005, Fancy et al. 2009) and initiated a long-term, collaborative monitoring program. Partners in this effort include the U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Forest Service, and Montana State University with representatives from each comprising the Greater Yellowstone Whitebark Pine Monitoring Working Group. The objectives of the monitoring program are to assess trends in (1) the proportion of live, whitebark pine trees (>1.4-m tall) infected with white pine blister rust (blister rust); (2) to document blister rust infection severity by the occurrence and location of persisting and new infections; (3) to determine mortality of whitebark pine trees and describe potential factors contributing to the death of trees; and (4) to assess the multiple components of the recruitment of understory whitebark pine into the reproductive population. In this report we summarize the past eight years (2004-2011) of whitebark pine status and trend monitoring in the GYE. Our study area encompasses six national forests (NF), two national parks (NP), as well as state and private lands in portions of Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho; this area is collectively described as the GYE here and in other studies. The sampling design is a probabilistic, twostage cluster design with stands of whitebark pine as the primary units and 10x50 m belt transects as the secondary units. Primary sampling units (stands) were selected randomly from a sample frame of approximately 10,770 mapped pure and mixed whitebark pine stands ≥2.0 hectares in the GYE (Dixon 1997, Landenburger 2012). From 2004 through 2007 (monitoring transect establishment or initial time-step), we established 176 permanent belt transects (secondary sampling units=176) in 150 whitebark pine stands and permanently marked approximately 4,740 individual trees >1.4 m tall to monitor long-term changes in blister rust infection and survival rates. Between 2008 and 2011 (revisit time-step), these same 176 transects were surveyed and again all previously tagged trees were observed for changes in blister rust infection and survival status. Objective 1. Using a combined ratio estimator, we estimated the proportion of live trees infected in the GYE in the initial time-step (2004-2007) to be 0.22 (0.031 SE). Following the completion of all surveys in the revisit time-step (2008-2011), we estimated the proportion of live trees infected with white pine blister rust as 0.23 (0.028 SE; Table 2). We detected no significant change in the proportion of trees infected in the GYE between the two time-steps. Objective 2. We documented blister rust canker locations as occurring in the canopy or bole. We compared changes in canker position between the initial time-step (2004-2007) and the revisit time-step (2008-2011) in order to assess changes in infection severity. This analysis included the 3,795 trees tagged during the initial time-step that were located and documented as alive at the end of the revisit time-step. At the end of the revisit time-step, we found 1,217 trees infected with blister rust. This includes the 287 newly tagged trees in the revisit time step of which 14 had documented infections. Of these 1,217 trees, 780 trees were infected with blister rust in both time steps. Trees with only canopy cankers made up approximately 43% (519 trees) of the total number of trees infected with blister rust at the end of the revisit time-step, while trees with only bole cankers comprised 20% (252 trees), and those with both canopy and bole cankers included 37% (446 trees) of the infected sample. A bole infection is considered to be more consequential than a canopy canker, as it compromises not only the overall longevity of the tree, but its functional capacity for reproductive output as well (Kendall and Arno 1990, Campbell and Antos 2000, McDonald and Hoff 2001, Schwandt and Kegley 2004). In addition to infection location, we also documented infection transition between the canopy and bole. Of the 780 live trees that were infected with blister rust in both time-steps, approximately 31% (242) maintained canopy cankers and 36% (281) retained bole infections at the end of the revisit time-step. Infection transition from canopy to bole occurred in 30% (234) of the revisit time-step trees while 3% (23) transitioned from bole to canopy infections during this period. Objective 3. To determine whitebark pine mortality, we resurveyed all belt transects to reassess the life status of permanently tagged trees >1.4 m tall. We compared the total number of live tagged trees recorded during monitoring transect establishment to the total number of resurveyed dead tagged trees recorded during the revisit time-step and identified all potential mortality-influencing conditions (blister rust, mountain pine beetle, fire and other). By the end of the revisit time-step, we observed a total of 975 dead tagged whitebark pine trees; using a ratio estimator, this represents a loss of approximately 20% (SE=4.35%) of the original live tagged tree population (GYWPMWG 2012). Objective 4. To investigate the proportion of live, reproducing tagged trees, we divided the total number of positively identified cone-bearing trees by the total number of live trees in the tagged tree sample at the end of the revisit time-step. To approximate the average density of recruitment trees per stand, trees ≤1.4 m tall were summed by stand (within the 500 m² transect area) and divided by the total number of stands. Reproducing trees made up approximately 24% (996 trees) of the total live tagged population at the end of the revisit time-step. Differentiating between whitebark pine and limber pine seedlings or saplings is problematic given the absence of cones or cone scars. Therefore, understory summaries as presented in this report may include individuals of both species when they are sympatric in a stand. The average density of small trees ≤1.4 m tall was 53 understory trees per 500 m². Raw counts of these understory individuals ranged from 0-635 small trees per belt transect. In addition, a total of 287 trees were added to the tagged tree population by the end of 2011. These newly tagged trees were individuals that upon subsequent revisits had reached a height of >1.4 m tall and subsequently added to the sample. Throughout the past decade in the GYE, monitoring has helped document shifts in whitebark pine forests; whitebark pine stands have been impacted by insect, pathogen, wildland fire, and other disturbance events. Blister rust infection is ubiquitous throughout the ecosystem and infection proportions are variable across the region. And while we have documented mortality of whitebark pine, we have also recorded considerable recruitment. We provide this first step-trend report as a quantifiable baseline for understanding the state of whitebark pine in the GYE. Many aspects of whitebark pine health are highly variable across the range of its distribution in the GYE. Through sustained implementation of the monitoring program, we will continue efforts to document and quantify whitebark pine forest dynamics as they arise under periodic upsurges in insect, pathogen, fire episodes, and climatic events in the GYE. Since its inception, this monitoring program perseveres as one of the only sustained longterm efforts conducted in the GYE with a singular purpose to track the health and status of this prominent keystone species.

Natural Resource Technical Report↗