Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Science Activities”

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
USGS2010

Extended abstracts from the Coastal Habitats in Puget Sound (CHIPS) 2006 Workshop

Puget Sound is the second largest estuary in the United States. Its unique geology, climate, and nutrient-rich waters produce and sustain biologically productive coastal habitats. These same natural characteristics also contribute to a high quality of life that has led to a significant growth in human population and associated development. This population growth, and the accompanying rural and urban development, has played a role in degrading Puget Sound ecosystems, including declines in fish and wildlife populations, water-quality issues, and loss and degradation of coastal habitats. In response to these ecosystem declines and the potential for strategic large-scale preservation and restoration, a coalition of local, State, and Federal agencies, including the private sector, Tribes, and local universities, initiated the Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project (PSNERP). The Nearshore Science Team (NST) of PSNERP, along with the U.S. Geological Survey, developed a Science Strategy and Research Plan (Gelfenbaum and others, 2006) to help guide science activities associated with nearshore ecosystem restoration. Implementation of the Research Plan includes a call for State and Federal agencies to direct scientific studies to support PSNERP information needs. In addition, the overall Science Strategy promotes greater communication with decision makers and dissemination of scientific results to the broader scientific community. On November 14–16, 2006, the U.S. Geological Survey sponsored an interdisciplinary Coastal Habitats in Puget Sound (CHIPS) Research Workshop at Fort Worden State Park, Port Townsend, Washington. The main goals of the workshop were to coordinate, integrate, and link research on the nearshore of Puget Sound. Presented research focused on three themes: (1) restoration of large river deltas; (2) recovery of the nearshore ecosystem of the Elwha River; and (3) effects of urbanization on nearshore ecosystems. The more than 35 presentations covered a wide range of ongoing inter-disciplinary research, including studies of sediment geochemistry of aquatic environments, sediment budgets, tracking fish pathways, expansion of invasive forams, beach and nearshore sedimentary environments, using influence diagrams as a decision support tool, forage fish, submarine groundwater, and much, much more. The primary focus within these themes was on developing information on the physical, chemical, and biological processes, as well as the human dimensions, associated with the restoration or rehabilitation of the nearshore environment. The workshop was an excellent opportunity for USGS scientists and collaborators who are working on Puget Sound coastal habitats to present their preliminary findings, discuss upcoming research, and to identify opportunities for interdisciplinary collaboration. A compilation of extended abstracts from workshop participants, this proceedings volume serves as a useful reference for attendees of the workshop and for those unable to attend. Taken together, the abstracts in this report provide a view of the current status of USGS multidisciplinary research on Puget Sound coastal habitats.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2016

Groundwater science relevant to the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement: A status report

When the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) was signed in 1972 by the Governments of Canada and the United States (the “Parties”) (Environment Canada, 2013a), groundwater was not recognized as important to the water quality of the Lakes. At that time, groundwater and surface water were still considered as two separate systems, with almost no appreciation for their interaction. When the GLWQA was revised in 1978 (US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 2012), groundwater contamination, such as that reported at legacy industrial sites such as those at Love Canal near the Niagara River, was squarely in the news. Consequently, the potential impacts of contaminated groundwater from such sites on Great Lakes water quality became a concern (Beck, 1979), and Annex 16 was added to the agreement, to address “pollution from contaminated groundwater” (Francis, 1989). However, no formal process for reporting under this annex was provided. The GLWQA Protocol in 1987 modified Annex 16 and called for progress reports beginning in 1988 (USEPA, 1988). The Protocol in 2012 provided a new Annex 8 to address groundwater more holistically (Environment 2 Canada, 2013b). Annex 8 (Environment Canada, 2013b) commits the Parties to coordinate groundwater science and management actions; as a first step, to “publish a report on the relevant and available groundwater science” by February 2015 (this report); and to “identify priorities for science activities and actions for groundwater management, protection, and remediation…” The broader mandate of Annex 8 is to (1) “identify groundwater impacts on the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the Waters of the Great Lakes;” (2) “analyze contaminants, including nutrients in groundwater, derived from both point and non-point sources impacting the Waters of the Great Lakes;” (3) “assess information gaps and science needs related to groundwater to protect the quality of the Waters of the Great Lakes;” and (4) “analyze other factors, such as climate change, that individually or cumulatively affect groundwater’s impact on the quality of the Waters of the Great Lakes.” A binational Annex 8 Subcommittee was formed to lead efforts to fulfill the mandate of this annex (members listed on p. i of this report). In turn, this subcommittee has recruited a task team to prepare this report (listed as authors of each chapter). This report addresses all of the above four objectives, based on a compilation of the “relevant and available groundwater science.” Specifically, the second objective (to “analyze contaminants”) is addressed by incorporating information obtained in ongoing monitoring and research activities conducted by the Parties, and by various other members of the Great Lakes Executive Committee.

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, ↗
USGS2023

Update on U.S. Geological Survey Fundamental Science Practices

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Fundamental Science Practices (FSP) are a set of standard principles fundamental to how USGS conducts and carries out its science activities and how resulting information products and data are reviewed, approved, and released. These policies, practices, philosophical premises, and operational principles serve as the foundation for all USGS research and monitoring activities and apply to all levels of the organization. The strength and future of the USGS depend on following these practices. USGS FSP were initiated in 2006 and fully implemented in 2009 to consolidate and standardize science practices across multiple scientific mission areas and science disciplines within the USGS.

Circular↗
USGS2019

South Atlantic Water Science Center Strategic Science Plan: 2019–23

Executive Summary The South Atlantic Water Science Center Strategic Science Planning Team has developed a unified strategic science plan to guide the science vision of the South Atlantic Water Science Center (SAWSC) in response to the merging of the Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina Water Science Centers. This plan proposes a path forward to keep SAWSC science activities relevant to the many diverse needs of stakeholders in the South Atlantic region (Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina) and considers the hydrologic setting and issues of the region. This plan advises the creation of five working groups to address five priority science topics for the period 2019–23 and beyond. The five priority science topics are (1) Foundational Data, (2) Effects of Land-Use Change, (3) Coastal Plain Science, (4) Water Availability, and (5) Hazards. From the goals laid forth in this plan for each priority science topic, the working groups plan to devise a set of strategic actions and milestones to be achieved by the SAWSC to provide valuable and relevant data, research, and assessments in the South Atlantic region. In this report, the “South Atlantic region” is used to describe the area encompassed by the States of North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2004

Third U.S. Geological Survey Wildland Fire-Science Workshop : Denver, Colorado, November 12-15, 2002

Executive Summary -- The historically significant wildland fire events that occurred in the United States during 2000 and 2002, together with the associated recognition of the need for a different national policy of forest management, has led to an increased awareness of the need for cooperative effort among all Federal agencies in planning for and managing the risks and consequences of wildland fire. The expertise and capabilities of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) are significant resources in this regard, and the agency is becoming increasingly involved in fire-science activities in support of the various land-management agencies that are dealing directly with this issue. The First USGS Wildland Fire Workshop was held in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, in 1997 and helped to establish the direction of USGS in sharing its expertise with the fire-management agencies. The Second USGS Wildland Fire Workshop was held in Los Alamos, New Mexico, in 2000 and brought together all the agencies involved in the management of wildland fires in order to determine their needs, to demonstrate USGS capabilities to meet those needs, and to establish methods for the USGS to distribute data and tools useful in fire management. It enhanced the relationships developed during the 1997 workshop and helped to define USGS' role in the fire-management community. The Third USGS Wildland Fire-Science Workshop, held in Denver, Colorado, November 12?15, 2002, was an opportunity for exchange of information on recent progress in the area of fire science and to determine the gaps in fire-science research that could be addressed by the USGS. In addition to more than 90 USGS scientists engaged in fire-related research and managers of organizational units involved in some aspect of wildland fire activities, the workshop was attended by about 30 representatives of 11 other Federal agencies. There also were a number of attendees affiliated with several universities, private companies, and State and local agencies. The 4-day meeting consisted of a pre-workshop field trip to the Hayman Fire area, several keynote presentations, five panel discussions, presentation and 'breakout' discussion of four 'white paper' topics, and a poster session with more than 30 presentations.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2013

U.S. Geological Survey climate and land use change science strategy—A framework for understanding and responding to global change

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), a nonregulatory Federal science agency with national scope and responsibilities, is uniquely positioned to serve the Nation’s needs in understanding and responding to global change, including changes in climate, water availability, sea level, land use and land cover, ecosystems, and global biogeochemical cycles. Global change is among the most challenging and formidable issues confronting our Nation and society. Scientists agree that global environmental changes during this century will have far-reaching societal implications (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007; U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2009). In the face of these challenges, the Nation can benefit greatly by using natural science information in decisionmaking. Since the passage of the U.S. Global Change Research Act of 1990, the USGS has made substantial scientific contributions to understanding the interactive living and nonliving components of the Earth system. USGS natural science activities have led to fundamental advances in observing and understanding climate and land-cover change and the effects these changes have on ecosystems, natural-resource availability, and societal sustainability. Most of these major advances were pursued in partnership with other organizations within and outside the Department of the Interior. The inherent value of partnerships with other U.S. Global Change Research Program agencies and natural-resource managers is emphasized in all aspects of the planning and implementation of this Science Strategy for the coming decade. Over the next 10 years, the USGS will make substantial contributions to understanding how Earth systems interact, respond to, and cause global change. The USGS will work with science partners, decisionmakers, and resource managers at local to international levels (including Native American tribes) to improve understanding of past and present change; develop relevant forecasts; and identify those lands, resources, and communities most vulnerable to global change processes. Science will play an essential role in helping communities and land and resource managers understand local to global implications, anticipate effects, prepare for changes, and reduce the risks associated with decisionmaking in a changing environment. USGS partners and stakeholders will benefit from the data, predictive models, and decision-support products and services resulting from the implementation of this strategy. This Science Strategy recognizes core USGS strengths that are applied to key societal problems. It establishes seven goals for USGS global change science and strategic actions that may be implemented in the short term (1–5 years) and the longer term (5–10 years) to improve our understanding of the following areas of inquiry: Rates, causes, and impacts of past global changes; The global carbon cycle; Biogeochemical cycles and their coupled interactions; Land-use and land-cover change rates, causes, and consequences; Droughts, floods, and water availability under changing land-use and climatic conditions; Coastal response to sea-level rise, climatic change, and human development; and Biological responses to global change. In addition to the seven thematic goals, we address the central role of monitoring in accordance with the USGS Science Strategy recommendation that global change research should rely on existing “…decades of observational data and long-term records to interpret consequences of climate variability and change to the Nation’s biological populations, ecosystems, and land and water resources” (U.S. Geological Survey, 2007, p. 19). We also briefly describe specific needs and opportunities for coordinating USGS global change science among USGS Mission Areas and address the need for a comprehensive and sustained communications strategy.

Circular↗
USGS2020

Using information from global climate models to inform policymaking—The role of the U.S. Geological Survey

This report provides an overview of model-based climate science in a risk management context. In addition, it summarizes how the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) will continue to follow best scientific practices and when and how the results of this research will be delivered to the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) and other stakeholders to inform policymaking. Climate change is a risk management challenge for society because of the uncertain consequences for natural and human systems across decades to centuries. Climate-related science activities within the USGS emphasize research on adaptation to climate change. This research helps inform adaptive management processes and planning activities within other DOI bureaus and by DOI stakeholders. Global climate models are sophisticated numerical representations of the Earth’s climate system. Research groups from around the world regularly participate in a coordinated effort to produce a suite of climate models. This global effort provides a test bed to assess model performance and analyze projections of future change under various prescribed climate scenarios. These climate scenarios describe a plausible future outcome associated with a specific set of societal actions. Because scenarios are developed in a risk-based framework with a high degree of uncertainty about future societal developments, they are usually not assigned a formal likelihood of occurrence. Examining a range of projected climate outcomes based on multiple scenarios is a recommended best practice because it allows decision makers to better consider both short- and long-term risks and opportunities. As part of its routine science practices, the USGS regularly reviews the state of knowledge of climate science, develops and maintains best practices in using global climate models to project climate change impacts, and provides data and interpretations of potential impacts to the DOI and other stakeholders. Management and policy decisions within the DOI will reflect different tolerances for risk, which has implications for what type of information should be considered and how that information should be used. It is suggested that a followup document be produced that would describe in more detail how these management decisions with differing risk tolerances can be made effectively and consistently in light of an uncertain future.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2007

Sustaining Rocky Mountain landscapes: Science, policy and management for the Crown of the Continent ecosystem

Prato and Fagre offer the first systematic, multi-disciplinary assessment of the challenges involved in managing the Crown of the Continent Ecosystem ( CCE), an area of the Rocky Mountains that includes northwestern Montana, southwestern Alberta, and southeastern British Columbia. The spectacular landscapes, extensive recreational options, and broad employment opportunities of the CCE have made it one of the fastest growing regions in the United States and Canada, and have lead to a shift in its economic base from extractive resource industries to service-oriented recreation and tourism industries. In the process, however, the amenities and attributes that draw people to this “New West” are under threat. Pastoral scenes are disappearing as agricultural lands and other open spaces are converted to residential uses, biodiversity is endangered by the fragmentation of fish and wildlife habitats, and many areas are experiencing a decline in air and water quality. Sustaining Rocky Mountain Landscapes provides a scientific basis for communities to develop policies for managing the growth and economic transformation of the CCE without sacrificing the quality of life and environment for which the land is renowned. This forthcoming edited volume focuses on five aspects of sustaining mountain landscapes in the CCE and similar regions in the Rocky Mountains. The five aspects are: 1) how social, economic, demo graphic and environmental forces are transforming ecosystem structure and function, 2) trends in use and conditions for human and environmental resources, 3) activating science, policy and education to enhance sustainable landscape management, 4) challenges to sustainable management of public and private lands, and 5) future prospects for achieving sustainable landscapes.

Idaho, Montana↗
USGS2020

Methods to quality assure, plot, summarize, interpolate, and extend groundwater-level information—Examples for the Mississippi River Valley alluvial aquifer

Large-scale computational investigations of groundwater levels are proposed to accelerate science delivery through a workflow spanning database assembly, statistics, and information synthesis and packaging. A water-availability study of the Mississippi River alluvial plain, and particularly the Mississippi River Valley alluvial aquifer (MRVA), is ongoing. Software (visGWDBmrva) has been released as part of the study that demonstrates groundwater informatics for the aquifer. Considerable water-level data collected by multiple agencies over a seven-state area exist (18,903 wells; 287,272 measurements [April 22, 2019]). Data and metadata quality assurance methods, basic statistics, hydrograph visualization, outlier identification, hypothesis testing, and time-series modeling are described. Two approaches (generalized additive models [GAMs] and support vector machines [SVMs]) are used for data interpolation and extension to monthly water-level estimates. Numerical congruence between GAM and SVM estimates will be useful to limit inclusion of monthly estimates from subsequent science activities.

Mississippi River valley↗
USGS2025

U.S. Geological Survey—Department of the Interior, Region 11, Alaska—2023–24 biennial science report

Introduction U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Mission—The USGS national mission is to monitor, analyze, and predict the current and evolving dynamics of complex human and natural Earth-system interactions and to deliver actionable information at scales and timeframes relevant to decision makers. Consistent with the national mission, the USGS in Alaska provides timely and objective scientific information to help address issues and inform management decisions across five interconnected focus areas: Energy and Minerals; Geospatial Mapping; Natural Hazards; Water Quality, Streamflow, and Ice Dynamics; and Ecosystems. The USGS in Alaska consists of approximately 350 scientists and support staff working in 3 Alaska-based science centers. USGS science activities are also initiated by the Cooperative Research Unit and USGS centers outside Alaska. In the last 5 years, USGS research in Alaska has produced many scientific benefits resulting from more than 900 publications. Publications relevant to Alaska can be conveniently searched by keyword through the USGS Publications Warehouse at https://pubs.usgs.gov/.

Alaska↗
USGS2007

Economic Growth and Landscape Change

Prato and Fagre offer the first systematic, multi-disciplinary assessment of the challenges involved in managing the Crown of the Continent Ecosystem (CCE), an area of the Rocky Mountains that includes northwestern Montana, southwestern Alberta, and southeastern British Columbia. The spectacular landscapes, extensive recreational options, and broad employment opportunities of the CCE have made it one of the fastest growing regions in the United States and Canada, and have lead to a shift in its economic base from extractive resource industries to service-oriented recreation and tourism industries. In the process, however, the amenities and attributes that draw people to this “New West” are under threat. Pastoral scenes are disappearing as agricultural lands and other open spaces are converted to residential uses, biodiversity is endangered by the fragmentation of fish and wildlife habitats, and many areas are experiencing a decline in air and water quality. Sustaining Rocky Mountain Landscapes provides a scientific basis for communities to develop policies for managing the growth and economic transformation of the CCE without sacrificing the quality of life and environment for which the land is renowned. This forthcoming edited volume focuses on five aspects of sustaining mountain landscapes in the CCE and similar regions in the Rocky Mountains. The five aspects are: 1) how social, economic, demographic and environmental forces are transforming ecosystem structure and function, 2) trends in use and conditions for human and environmental resources, 3) activating science, policy and education to enhance sustainable landscape management, 4) challenges to sustainable management of public and private lands, and 5) future prospects for achieving sustainable landscapes.

Book chapter↗
USGS1991

Satellite and earth science data management activities at the U.S. geological survey's EROS data center

The U.S. Geological Survey's Earth Resources Observation Systems (EROS) Data Center, the national archive for Landsat data, has 20 years of experience in acquiring, archiving, processing, and distributing Landsat and earth science data. The Center is expanding its satellite and earth science data management activities to support the U.S. Global Change Research Program and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Earth Observing System Program. The Center's current and future data management activities focus on land data and include: satellite and earth science data set acquisition, development and archiving; data set preservation, maintenance and conversion to more durable and accessible archive medium; development of an advanced Land Data Information System; development of enhanced data packaging and distribution mechanisms; and data processing, reprocessing, and product generation systems.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2011

USGS St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center--Research activities in the U.S. Virgin Islands

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center in Florida investigates earth-science processes related to coastal and marine environments as well as to societal implications of natural hazards, resource sustainability, and environmental change. The Center is conducting ongoing research in and around the U.S. Virgin Islands that is providing baseline information for resource management and for assessing the health of and environmental changes to vital ecosystems such as coral reefs. In particular, projects are improving the understanding of coral health, advancing the ability to forecast future changes in coral reef ecosystems, and acquiring topographic data for use in inventorying, monitoring, and conserving coastal and marine environments.

Virgin Islands↗
USGS2005

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

This quality-assurance plan documents the standards, policies, and procedures used by the U.S. Geological Survey's Washington Water Science Center, for activities related to the collection, processing, storage, analysis, and publication of ground-water data. This plan serves as a guide to all Washington Water Science Center personnel involved in ground-water activities, and changes as the needs and requirements of the Washington Water Science Center and Discipline change. Regular updates to this plan represent an integral part of the quality-assurance process.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2022

Training and capacity building activities of Climate Adaptation Science Centers for the benefit of Tribal and Indigenous communities, 2010–2019

Tribal nations and Indigenous communities are key collaborators on adaptation work within the Climate Adaptation Science Center (CASC) network. The centers have partnered with numerous Tribal and Indigenous communities on projects or activities to better understand the communities’ specific knowledge of and exposure to impacts of climate change, to increase or assist with capacity to support adaptation planning, and to identify and address climate science needs. Projects and activities generated in the various CASC regions have different Tribal and Indigenous stakeholders, climate change contexts, and training needs. Consequently, these projects and activities were neither implemented nor reported consistently throughout the network. Information and materials on the various projects and activities were gathered and are presented in the Tribal and Indigenous Projects Data Sheet (hereafter, Data Sheet) with the goals of reducing inconsistencies between CASCs and benefitting other agencies who plan to implement similar activities. The Data Sheet is complementary to this report, which provides a synthesis of the CASC-led climate-related, capacity-building activities for Tribes and Indigenous communities. The results described in this report provide an analysis of the categorization of projects, activities, and individual trainings to highlight detailed information on the various ways each CASC works with and supports Native and Indigenous communities.

General Information Product↗
USGS2013

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↗
USGS2008

Quality-Assurance Plan for Water-Quality Activities in the USGS Ohio Water Science Center

In accordance with guidelines set forth by the Office of Water Quality in the Water Resources Discipline of the U.S. Geological Survey, a quality-assurance plan has been written for use by the Ohio Water Science Center in conducting water-quality activities. This quality-assurance plan documents the standards, policies, and procedures used by the Ohio Water Science Center for activities related to the collection, processing, storage, analysis, and publication of water-quality data. The policies and procedures documented in this quality-assurance plan for water-quality activities are meant to complement the Ohio Water Science Center quality-assurance plans for water-quality monitors, the microbiology laboratory, and surface-water and ground-water activities.

Open-File Report↗