Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Yellowstone Science”

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
USGS2008

Yellowstone Volcano Observatory

Eruption of Yellowstone's Old Faithful Geyser. Yellowstone hosts the world's largest and most diverse collection of natural thermal features, which are the surface expression of magmatic heat at shallow depths in the crust. The Yellowstone system is monitored by the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory (YVO), a partnership among the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Yellowstone National Park, and the University of Utah. YVO is one of five USGS Volcano Hazards Program observatories that monitor U.S. volcanoes for science and public safety. Learn more about Yellowstone and YVO at http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/yvo.

General Information Product↗
USGS2014

Prodigious degassing of a billion years of accumulated radiogenic helium at Yellowstone

Helium is used as a critical tracer throughout the Earth sciences, where its relatively simple isotopic systematics is used to trace degassing from the mantle, to date groundwater and to time the rise of continents 1 . The hydrothermal system at Yellowstone National Park is famous for its high helium-3/helium-4 isotope ratio, commonly cited as evidence for a deep mantle source for the Yellowstone hotspot 2 . However, much of the helium emitted from this region is actually radiogenic helium-4 produced within the crust by α-decay of uranium and thorium. Here we show, by combining gas emission rates with chemistry and isotopic analyses, that crustal helium-4 emission rates from Yellowstone exceed (by orders of magnitude) any conceivable rate of generation within the crust. It seems that helium has accumulated for (at least) many hundreds of millions of years in Archaean (more than 2.5 billion years old) cratonic rocks beneath Yellowstone, only to be liberated over the past two million years by intense crustal metamorphism induced by the Yellowstone hotspot. Our results demonstrate the extremes in variability of crustal helium efflux on geologic timescales and imply crustal-scale open-system behaviour of helium in tectonically and magmatically active regions.

Wyoming↗
USGS2009

Three short videos by the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory

This is a collection of videos of unscripted interviews with Jake Lowenstern, who is the Scientist in Charge of the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory (YVO). YVO was created as a partnership among the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Yellowstone National Park, and University of Utah to strengthen the long-term monitoring of volcanic and earthquake unrest in the Yellowstone National Park region. Yellowstone is the site of the largest and most diverse collection of natural thermal features in the world and the first National Park. YVO is one of the five USGS Volcano Observatories that monitor volcanoes within the United States for science and public safety. These video presentations give insights about many topics of interest about this area. Title: Yes! Yellowstone is a Volcano An unscripted interview, January 2009, 7:00 Minutes Description: USGS Scientist-in-Charge of Yellowstone Volcano Observatory, Jake Lowenstern, answers the following questions to explain volcanic features at Yellowstone: 'How do we know Yellowstone is a volcano?', 'What is a Supervolcano?', 'What is a Caldera?','Why are there geysers at Yellowstone?', and 'What are the other geologic hazards in Yellowstone?' Title: Yellowstone Volcano Observatory An unscripted interview, January 2009, 7:15 Minutes Description: USGS Scientist-in-Charge of Yellowstone Volcano Observatory, Jake Lowenstern, answers the following questions about the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory: 'What is YVO?', 'How do you monitor volcanic activity at Yellowstone?', 'How are satellites used to study deformation?', 'Do you monitor geysers or any other aspect of the Park?', 'Are earthquakes and ground deformation common at Yellowstone?', 'Why is YVO a relatively small group?', and 'Where can I get more information?' Title: Yellowstone Eruptions An unscripted interview, January 2009, 6.45 Minutes Description: USGS Scientist-in-Charge of Yellowstone Volcano Observatory, Jake Lowenstern, answers the following questions to explain volcanic eruptions at Yellowstone: When was the last supereruption at Yellowstone?', 'Have any eruptions occurred since the last supereruption?', 'Is Yellowstone overdue for an eruption?', 'What does the magma below indicate about a possible eruption?', 'What else is possible?', and 'Why didn't you think the Yellowstone Lake earthquake swarm would lead to an eruption?'

Wyoming↗
USGS2024

U.S. Geological Survey Northern Rocky Mountain Science Center science highlights for fiscal year 2023

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Northern Rocky Mountain Science Center is based in Bozeman, Montana, and has field offices in Glacier National Park, Mont.; Missoula, Mont.; and Knoxville, Tennessee. Our scientists respond to the natural resource management needs of Federal, Tribal, and State partners—directly engaging in the coproduction and application of integrated, interdisciplinary science—and perform place-based research throughout the northern Rocky Mountains, including Yellowstone and Glacier National Parks and the northern Great Plains. However, the scope and implications of our research extend across the Nation. Our research themes are as follows: (1) climate change and drought, (2) species at risk, (3) habitat in changing landscapes, and (4) invasive species and wildlife disease. This Fact Sheet highlights examples of dynamic partnerships and key advances in our themes in fiscal year 2023 (October 2022–September 2023).

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2010

Protocols for geologic hazards response by the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory to activity within the Yellowstone Volcanic System

Executive Summary The Yellowstone Plateau hosts an active volcanic system, with subterranean magma (molten rock), boiling, pressurized waters, and a variety of active faults with significant earthquake hazards. Within the next few decades, light-to-moderate earthquakes and steam explosions are certain to occur. Volcanic eruptions are less likely, but are ultimately inevitable in this active volcanic region. This document summarizes protocols, policies, and tools to be used by the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory (YVO) during earthquakes, hydrothermal explosions, or any geologic activity that could lead to a volcanic eruption. Yellowstone National Park is home to Yellowstone Caldera, the largest volcanic system by volume in the United States, as well as a vigorous hydrothermal system composed of pressurized subsurface boiling waters and active faults capable of generating substantial seismicity. The region is subject to hazards spanning a wide range of intensities, magnitudes, likelihood of occurrence, and geographic extent of impact. These hazards include small and comparatively common hydrothermal explosions, occasional strong earthquakes, rare relatively non-explosive lava flows, and very rare large explosive volcanic eruptions. Addressing the broad style of potential hazards and the vast spatial and temporal scales over which these hazards can occur requires a general plan that outlines the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory (YVO) response to a hazardous or potentially hazardous geological event or unrest (defined as departure from normal activity levels). The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Volcano Science Center (VSC) Response Plan for Significant Volcanic Events in the United States (Moran and others, 2024) forms the basis of any response by YVO but will be modified to suit the specific characteristics of the observatory, which operates as a consortium of nine federal, state, and academic institutions. Decisions on declaring an event response or “activity with potential” (defined as unrest that is not immediately hazardous but that may evolve into a hazardous event), as well as any changes in Volcano Alert Level and Aviation Color Code or the release of formal Information Statements, will be made by the USGS via the YVO Scientist-in-Charge (SIC) in consultation with the leads of the YVO member agencies. The YVO response to hazardous or potentially hazardous geological activity in or around Yellowstone National Park will focus on the collection and analysis of data relevant to the location and style of the activity. Those data will be interpreted within the existing geological framework for the region to develop probabilistic assessments of potential outcomes. These interpretations and assessments will be used to support decision making by emergency management officials including Yellowstone National Park managers or within the National Incident Management System if an Incident Command System (ICS) is activated. YVO will also convene a communications group open to each member agency to ensure consistent internal and external messaging and that the public is kept informed of the unrest through formal notifications, social media posts, online content, traditional media interviews, and community meetings. This response plan will be evaluated and updated as needed by the observatory and will be available through the YVO and USGS public websites. Responses to volcanic eruptions and responses outside of the Yellowstone region, but within the YVO area of responsibility (including Arizona, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado), will follow the U.S. Geological Survey Volcano Science Center Response Plan for Significant Volcanic Events in the United States (Moran and others, 2024).

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming↗
USGS2022

Volcano and earthquake monitoring plan for the Yellowstone Caldera system, 2022–2032

Executive Summary The Yellowstone Volcano Observatory (YVO) is a consortium of nine Federal, State, and academic agencies that: (1) provides timely monitoring and hazards assessment of volcanic, hydrothermal, and earthquake activity in and around Yellowstone National Park, and (2) conducts research to develop new approaches to volcano monitoring and better understand volcanic activity in the Yellowstone region and elsewhere. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) arm of YVO is also responsible for monitoring and reporting on volcanic activity in the Intermountain West of the United States. The previous YVO monitoring plan for the Yellowstone region spanned 2006–2015 and focused on strengthening the region-wide coverage, or backbone, of monitoring systems (Yellowstone Volcano Observatory, 2006). The goals of that plan have largely been achieved thanks to significant investments in instrumentation and infrastructure, especially by the National Science Foundation EarthScope Plate Boundary Observatory (now known as the Network Of The Americas, or NOTA) and the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act. This revision of the monitoring plan, covering 2022–2032, builds upon these improvements to monitoring systems in the Yellowstone region while also accounting for new insights into the dynamics of the area’s seismic, volcanic, and hydrothermal activity. These additional improvements are designed to fill gaps in the monitoring network and to better understand and track hazards associated with hydrothermal processes. These improvements include: Conversion of remaining analog seismic stations to digital, Addition of Global Positioning System (GPS) stations in the vicinity of Norris Geyser Basin and other areas where changes in deformation rate and style have been observed, Implementation of continuous gas monitoring in several areas of Yellowstone National Park, and Improvements to lake, meteorological, and hydrological monitoring to better track hydrothermal activity, including that occurring on lake bottoms, and to aid in understanding of whether such activity might be influenced by external forces, like environmental conditions. The 2022–2032 monitoring plan for the Yellowstone volcanic system also proposes to improve monitoring of hydrothermal areas to better understand these dynamic systems and their associated hazards. To date, only a single seismometer has been placed within one of Yellowstone National Park’s geyser basins because seismic noise associated with boiling water can hinder interpretation of overall seismic and magmatic activity, but this concern has been mitigated by improvements to backbone monitoring. Deployment of geophysical, geochemical, hydrological, and geological monitoring instruments in geyser basins will be accompanied by campaigns to measure gas and water chemistry and flux, as well as aerial and satellite surveys of gas and thermal emissions. Close collaboration between YVO member institutions and other research agencies is needed to achieve these monitoring goals and to use the derived data to advance understanding of how Yellowstone Caldera and similar volcanic systems work. At the same time, attention must be paid to minimize the impact of monitoring efforts and infrastructure on the environment. YVO thus commits to serving as stewards of the natural, cultural, and historical resources in and around Yellowstone National Park while maximizing scientific gain for the betterment of society.

Wyoming↗
USGS2024

Streams, springs, and volcanic lakes for volcano monitoring

Introduction Volcanic unrest can trigger appreciable change to surface waters such as streams, springs, and volcanic lakes. Magma degassing produces gases and soluble salts that are absorbed into groundwater that feeds streams and lakes. As magma ascends, the amount of heat and degassing will increase, and so will any related geochemical and thermal signal. Subsurface magma movement can cause pressurization that alters hydrostatic head and may induce groundwater discharge. Fluid-pressure changes have been linked to distal volcano-tectonic earthquakes (White and McCausland, 2016; Coulon and others, 2017) and phreatic eruptions (for example, Yamaoka and others, 2016). Clearly, changes in groundwater and surface waters are both indicators of unrest and clues to how and where magma is rising toward the surface. Where possible, it is prudent to incorporate real-time hydrologic data into multiparameter monitoring of restless volcanoes. Hydrologic dynamics can also be tracked by changes in groundwater levels that are commonly measured in shallow boreholes (see of Flinders, A.F., Lowenstern, J.B., Coombs, M.L., and Poland, M.P., eds., Recommended capabilities and instrumentation for volcano monitoring in the United States: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2024–5062–K, 5 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20245062k. ">chapter K , this volume, on boreholes; Hurwitz and Lowenstern, 2024). Although inferred to be common, relatively few volcano-hydrology anomalies are well documented, and many are essentially anecdotal (Newhall and others, 2001), reflecting the fact that high-resolution time series remain rare. Extreme examples include the 2008 eruption of Nevado del Huila, Colombia, where relatively minor phreatomagmatic eruptions were accompanied by expulsion of as much as 300 million cubic meters of groundwater from fissures high on the volcano (Worni and others, 2011), generating large lahars. Substantial decreases in flow rate from springs about 8 kilometers from the summit of Mayon Volcano, Philippines, have been noted before most eruptions in the 20th century (Newhall and others, 2001). Stream monitoring at Redoubt Volcano in 2009 allowed Werner and others (2012) to recognize that groundwater was unable to absorb (or scrub) the high flux of volcanic gas and that a high CO 2 /SO 2 precursor signal had been evident for 5 months prior to the eruption. A key to better interpreting hydrologic anomalies—or even identifying them—is therefore obtaining adequate baseline data. Most hydrologic monitoring at U.S. volcanoes has been accomplished by intermittent sampling surveys with annual or less frequent sampling (for example, https://hotspringchem.wr.usgs.gov/index.php ). More frequent sampling, however, generally is needed to establish reliable baselines. A recent hydrologic and hydrothermal monitoring experiment at 25 sites and 10 of the 12 level 4 (very high threat) volcanoes in the U.S. portion of the Cascade Range demonstrated that there is sufficient temporal variability in hydrothermal fluxes, even during quiescent periods, that one-time measurements will commonly have limited interpretive value (Crankshaw and others, 2018). Thus, surveys are best augmented with data from streamgages (for example, Evans and others, 2004; Bergfeld and others, 2008). Streamflow (water discharge) data allow measured temperature and specific conductance to be converted to heat and solute mass fluxes, which could be insightful parameters for detecting anomalous activity (McCleskey and others, 2012). At the Yellowstone Caldera, long-term monitoring of river solutes has allowed calculation of the chloride flux, a proxy for heat discharge (Hurwitz and others, 2007; McCleskey and others, 2016) from the subsurface magma. This is readily accomplished because data from streamgages are continuously recorded and archived by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Water Information System (NWIS) (USGS, 2024). Similar studies on stratovolcanoes or shield volcanoes would be scientifically useful, and yet are logistically challenging, requiring streamgages on numerous radial drainages complemented by either frequent manual sampling or numerous deployments of equipment to measure water temperature and specific conductance as a proxy for water chemistry. Another challenge is that some volcanic areas, especially shield volcanoes, are characterized by near-surface porous rocks and soils, such that surface streams are rare and replaced by distant, dilute large-volume springs with only a trace of any original volcanically sourced water (Manga, 2001; Hurwitz and others, 2021). Volcanic lakes are worthy of special attention for monitoring efforts, as their temperature and composition can provide evidence of increased flux of volatile-rich fluids from below. Quantifying changes in volatile and heat release from magma can be simpler in lakes than for volcanoes with radial drainages and no major lakes. Moreover, volcanic lakes pose a range of hazards themselves, including phreatomagmatic eruptions, debris flows, flank collapse, tsunamis, and toxic gas release (Mastin and Witter, 2000; Delmelle and others, 2015; Manville, 2015; Rouwet and others, 2015)—hazards that have historically been responsible for substantial loss of life at many volcanoes worldwide (Manville, 2015). Catastrophic CO 2 release at Lake Nyos, Cameroon, in 1986 suffocated about 1,750 people and about 3,500 livestock and was probably triggered by a large landslide into the gas-saturated lake (Kling and others, 1987; Evans and others, 1993). Gas-charged springs in Soda Bay within Clear Lake (California) have caused almost a dozen deaths to bathers in the past hundred years (ABC News, 2000). A 2005 example of lake overturn and abundant gas release was documented at Mount Chiginagak in Alaska (Schaefer and others, 2008) but did not result in any human casualties. Although thermally stratified lakes, which promote trapping of exsolved magmatic gas, tend to develop in tropical regions, the phenomenon can also arise where salinity creates meromixis (a condition in which a lake does not mix completely), as occurs in Mono Lake, California (Jellison and Melack, 1993; Jellison and others, 1998). If magma erupts or flows into a lake, the interaction between hot magma and cold water can be explosive (Mastin and others, 2004; Zimanowski and others, 2015) and substantially expand the area affected by the eruption. Another hazard is the breaching of crater rims by landslides triggered by volcanic and (or) seismic activity. Under some circumstances, substantial volumes of water can be displaced, leading to large floods and lahars. Late Holocene lake flooding from Aniakchak Crater in the Alaska Peninsula (Waythomas, 2022) and from Paulina Lake in Newberry Crater, Oregon (Chitwood and Jensen, 2000), caused by the failure of outlet sills, testify to the substantial hazards at lake-filled calderas. Several volcanic systems in the United States host lakes known to receive heat and gas from underlying magma. These lakes vary widely in area, depth, and chemical composition. Lakes are present at level 4 volcanoes, including Crater Lake and Newberry Volcano in Oregon; Yellowstone Caldera in Wyoming; Long Valley Caldera, Clear Lake volcanic field, Medicine Lake, and Salton Buttes in California; and Aniakchak Crater, Mount Katmai, Fisher Caldera, Mount Okmok, and Kaguyak Crater, among others, in Alaska. A water lake was present in Halemaʻumaʻu, the crater of Kīlauea, Hawai‘i (fig. F1), from October 2019 to December 2020. Level 3 volcanoes with lakes include Mono Lake volcanic field (Calif.), Mount Bachelor (Ore.), Ukinrek Maars and Mount Chiginagak (Alaska), and Soda Lake (Nevada). In addition, there are lakes at many levels 1 and 2 volcanoes. In the United States, there are no strongly acidic lakes that receive abundant input of magmatic gas, such as those found at Mount Ruapehu (New Zealand), Ijen and Kelud (Indonesia), and Poás (Costa Rica). Nevertheless, many contain fluids that provide clues to magmatic processes below. Since publication of a previous report on recommended instrumentation for volcano monitoring (Moran and others, 2008), continuous hydrologic monitoring has become increasingly feasible. However, changes in water pressure, temperature, and chemistry remain, in general, poorly studied phenomena at volcanoes (Sparks, 2003; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2017). Recent efforts by the USGS have included the temporary study of Cascade Range volcanoes, which included frequent (15 minute to hourly) temporal sampling of temperature, depth, and conductivity (Crankshaw and others, 2018; Ingebritsen and Evans, 2019). At Yellowstone Caldera, many streamgages have now added thermistors and specific conductance sensors, allowing estimation of time-dependent chloride flux as a proxy for variations in subsurface heat flux (McCleskey and others, 2012, 2016). Efforts to better understand lakes have also accelerated, with bathymetric mapping and sampling carried out at several locations in the United States. Especially thorough work was done at Yellowstone Lake thanks to the Hydrothermal Dynamics of Yellowstone Lake (HD-YLAKE, https://hdylake.org ) project, funded primarily by the National Science Foundation. In addition to geophysical surveys and recovery of cores and other samples, HD-YLAKE investigations included remotely operated vehicle (ROV) investigations of hydrothermal vents on the lake floor (fig. F2). Data collected by the ROV provided a better understanding of the thermal and chemical influx from lake-bottom hydrothermal systems (Sohn and others, 2017). In this chapter, we focus on detecting changes in the chemistry, temperature, discharge, or water levels of streams, springs, and lakes that can be caused by seismicity, volumetric strains, or increases in gas flux associated with ascending magma. There is unavoidable overlap with other chapters of this report. Samples of water and gas can also be obtained in boreholes ( of Flinders, A.F., Lowenstern, J.B., Coombs, M.L., and Poland, M.P., eds., Recommended capabilities and instrumentation for volcano monitoring in the United States: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2024–5062–K, 5 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20245062k. ">chapter K , this volume; Hurwitz and Lowenstern, 2024), both shallow and deep. Gas monitoring ( of Flinders, A.F., Lowenstern, J.B., Coombs, M.L., and Poland, M.P., eds., Recommended capabilities and instrumentation for volcano monitoring in the United States: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2024–5062–E, 11 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20245062e.">chapter E , this volume; Lewicki and others, 2024) relies in part on samples from springs and wells, particularly where measurable gas plumes are absent. Water acts as a trigger and lubricant for landslides and sediment-rich floods, and so hydrology has obvious relevance for lahar monitoring, as discussed in of Flinders, A.F., Lowenstern, J.B., Coombs, M.L., and Poland, M.P., eds., Recommended capabilities and instrumentation for volcano monitoring in the United States: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2024–5062–H, 6 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20245062h. ">chapter H (this volume; Thelen and others, 2024). Shared situational awareness among scientists engaged in geophysical, gas, and hydrologic monitoring will improve overall understanding of the volcanic hazard.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2011

Twenty Years After the 1988 Yellowstone Fires: Lessons About Disturbance and Ecosystems

The 1988 Yellowstone fires were among the first in what has proven to be an upsurge in large severe fires in the western USA during the past 20 years. At the time of the fires, little was known about the impacts of such a large severe disturbance because scientists had had few previous opportunities to study such an event. Ecologists predicted short- and long-term effects of the 1988 fires on vegetation, biogeochemistry, primary productivity, wildlife, and aquatic ecosystems based on scientific understanding of the time. Twenty-plus years of subsequent study allow these early predictions to be evaluated. Most of the original predictions were at least partially supported, but some predictions were refuted, others nuanced, and a few postfire phenomena were entirely unexpected. Post-1988 Yellowstone studies catalyzed advances in ecology focused on the importance of spatial and temporal heterogeneity, contingent influences, and multiple interacting drivers. Post-1988 research in Yellowstone also has changed public perceptions of fire as an ecological process and attitudes towards fire management. Looking ahead to projected climate change and more frequent large fires, the well-documented ecological responses to the 1988 Yellowstone fires provide a foundation for detecting and evaluating potential changes in fire regimes of temperate mountainous regions. ?? 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC.

Ecosystems↗
USGS2007

Yellowstone grizzly bear investigations: Annual report of the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team, 2006

The contents of this Annual Report summarize results of monitoring and research from the 2006 field season. The report also contains a summary of nuisance grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos horribilis ) management actions. The Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team (IGBST) continues to work on issues associated with counts of unduplicated females with cubs-of- the-year (COY). These counts are used to establish a minimum population size, which is then used to establish mortality thresholds for the Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 1993). After considerable delays due to programming issues, a computer program that defines the rule set used by Knight et al. (1995) to differentiate unique family groups was development and tested in 2005 and 2006. Simulations using observations of collared females with COY were randomly sampled to generate datasets of observations of random females with COY. These datasets were then run though the simulations program to test the accuracy of the rules. Data are currently being summarized. This project has been completed and a manuscript was submitted to the Journal of Wildlife Management. The grizzly bear recovery plan (USFWS 1993) established human-caused mortality quotas. We used the latest information on reproduction and survival to estimate population trajectory in the same simulation model originally used by Harris (1984). A Wildlife Monographs was published in 2006. Additionally, the study team, in cooperation with several quantitative experts, reassessed how population size is indexed and how sustainable mortality rates are established. A draft report was presented to the Yellowstone Ecosystem Subcommittee in spring 2005. It was published as part of the USFWS Delisting Rule (Federal Register Vol. 70, No. 221, Nov. 17, 2005, 69853–69884) and subjected to public comment. This workshop document can be found at http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/grizzly/yellowstone.htm. During the summer of 2006, a second workshop was held to address public comment and professional peer review. The result of this workshop was a supplement to the 2005 workshop document. This supplement can be found at http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/grizzly/yellowstone.htm under the link Revised Methods to Estimate Population Size and Sustainable Mortality Limits. Results of those estimates are provided in Appendix A. Our project addressing the potential application of stable isotopes and trace elements to quantify consumption rates of whitebark pine ( Pinus albicaulis ) and cutthroat trout ( Oncorhynchus clarki ) by grizzly bears was completed. Our manuscript on consumption rates of whitebark pine was published in the Canadian Journal of Zoology 81:763-770. Results of the mercury studies were also published in the Canadian Journal of Zoology 82:493–501. Copies can be found on the IGBST website http://www.nrmsc.usgs.gov/research/igbst-home.htm. Based upon this work, we submitted a proposal to analyze all historic tissue samples from grizzly bears in the ecosystem. That proposal was funded and samples have been sent to a lab for isotopic analysis. We hope to have those results in early 2008. Results of DNA hair snaring work conducted on Yellowstone Lake were submitted and published in the Journal Ursus (Haroldson et al. 2005). Results of this study conducted from 1997–2000 showed a decline in fish use by grizzly bears when compared to earlier work conducted by Reinhart (1990) in 1985–1987. As a consequence, the IGBST submitted a proposal to the National Park Service and received 3 years funding to repeat that work. This project began in 2007. There are 2 graduate students and several field technicians working on the program. We completed the final field season in Grand Teton National Park evaluating habitat use both temporally and spatially between grizzly and black bears ( Ursus americanus ). We continue to use GPS technology that incorporates a spread spectrum communication system. Spread spectrum allows for transfer of stored GPS locations from the collar to a remote receiving station. Results of the 2006 field season are reported here. We plan to complete the final report in late 2007. We continued to monitor the health of whitebark pine in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) in cooperation with the Greater Yellowstone Whitebark Pine Monitoring Working Group. A summary of the 2006 monitoring is also presented (Appendix B). The IGBST uses counts of winter-killed ungulates to index spring carcass abundance for grizzly bears. Likewise, we use wier counts and stream surveys to index cutthroat trout abundance. We ask Dr. Steve Cherry, Department of Mathematical Sciences, Montana State University-Bozeman, to review the protocols and make recommendations for improving them. That review and recommendations are presented in Appendix C. Finally, the state of Wyoming, following recommendations from the Yellowstone Ecosystem Subcommittee and the IGBST, launched the Bear Wise Community Effort. The focus is to minimize human/bear conflicts, minimize human-caused bear mortalities associated with conflicts, and safeguard the human community. Results of these efforts are detailed in Appendix D. The annual reports of the IGBST summarize annual data collection. Because additional information can be obtained after publication, data summaries are subject to change. For that reason, data analyses and summaries presented in this report supersede all previously published data. The study area and sampling techniques are reported by Blanchard (1985), Mattson et al. (1991 a), and Haroldson et al. (1998).

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming↗
USGS2012

Disparate stakeholder management: the case of elk and bison feeding in southern Greater Yellowstone

For resource decisions to make the most possible progress toward achieving agency mandates, managers must work with stakeholders and may need to at least partially accommodate some of their key underlying interests. To accommodate stakeholder interests, while also substantively working toward fulfilling legal mandates, managers must understand the sociopolitical factors that influence the decision-making process. We coin the phrase disparate stakeholder management (DSM) to describe situations with disparate stakeholders and disparate management solutions. A DSM approach (DSMA) requires decision makers to combine concepts from many sciences, thus releasing them from disciplinary bonds that often constrain innovation and effectiveness. We combined three distinct approaches to develop a DSMA that assisted in developing a comprehensive range of elk and bison management alternatives in the Southern Greater Yellowstone Area. The DSMA illustrated the extent of compromise between meeting legal agency mandates and accommodating the preferences of certain stakeholder groups.

Wyoming↗
USGS2013

Volcano crisis response at Yellowstone volcanic complex - after-action report for exercise held at Salt Lake City, Utah, November 15, 2011

A functional tabletop exercise was run on November 14-15, 2011 in Salt Lake City, Utah, to test crisis response capabilities, communication protocols, and decision-making by the staff of the multi-agency Yellowstone Volcano Observatory (YVO) as they reacted to a hypothetical exercise scenario of accelerating volcanic unrest at the Yellowstone caldera. The exercise simulated a rapid build-up of seismic activity, ground deformation, and hot-spring water-chemistry and temperature anomalies that culminated in a small- to moderate-size phreatomagmatic eruption within Yellowstone National Park. The YVO scientific team's responses to the unfolding events in the scenario and to simulated requests for information by stakeholders and the media were assessed by (a) the exercise organizers; (b) several non-YVO scientists, who observed and queried participants, and took notes throughout the exercise; and (c) the participants themselves, who kept logs of their actions during the exercise and later participated in a group debriefing session and filled out detailed questionnaires. These evaluations were tabulated, interpreted, and summarized for this report, and on the basis of this information, recommendations have been made. Overall, the YVO teams performed their jobs very well. The exercise revealed that YVO scientists were able to successfully provide critical hazards information, issue information statements, and appropriately raise alert levels during a fast-moving crisis. Based on the exercise, it is recommended that several measures be taken to increase YVO effectiveness during a crisis: 1. Improve role clarification within and between YVO science teams. 2. Improve communications tools and protocols for data-sharing and consensus-building among YVO scientists, who are geographically and administratively dispersed among various institutions across the United States. 3. Familiarize YVO staff with Incident Command System (ICS) procedures and protocols, and provide more in-depth training to appropriate staff members, as needed. 4. Train all science team members in the use of all analytical and computational tools available to them, in order to maximize effectiveness of teams in tracking and interpreting possible accelerating unrest at Yellowstone. Desirable pre-crisis preparations include: (a) updating a catalog of existing map and information products (and identifying additional products) that would be helpful during a crisis; (b) creating "to do" lists of early-crisis tasks for each scientific team; (c) coordinating radio frequencies among partner agencies; and (d) brief training on and promotion of the internal YVO Web log as a repository for scientific observations, data, photographs, and other material to be shared among YVO scientific teams during a crisis. This exercise was designed as an opportunity to practice response to a fast-developing volcano crisis and to test for organizational and procedural weaknesses that could emerge during a real crisis. This report is based upon the observations of the exercise organizers during the one-day exercise and upon written evaluations by the participants. It does not attempt to evaluate any other aspect of YVO or the scientific expertise of any of the highly competent YVO staff. Participants unanimously found the exercise to be helpful for improving their response capabilities, and it is our hope that the report will be a starting point for internal discussions that will make YVO even better-prepared for some future volcano crisis.

Utah↗
USGS2005

Yellowstone grizzly bear investigations: Annual report of the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team, 2004

The contents of this Annual Report summarize results of monitoring and research from the 2004 field season. The report also contains a summary of nuisance grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos horribilis ) management actions. The study team continues to work on issues associated with counts of unduplicated females with cubs-of-the-year (COY). These counts are used to establish a minimum population size, which is then used to establish mortality thresholds for the Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 1993). A computer program that defines the rule set used by Knight et al. (1995) to differentiate unique family groups was completed in spring 2005. We will use an improved version of this model to verify the accuracy of the rules using known bears and their telemetry locations in test runs. We hope to have this work complete by the end of 2005. The grizzly bear recovery plan (USFWS 1993) established mortality quotas at 4% of the minimum population estimate derived from female with COY data and no more than 30% of the 4% (1.2%) could be female bears. Simulation modeling (Harris 1984) established sustainable mortality at around 6% of the population. We used the latest information on reproduction and survival to estimate population trajectory in the same simulation model originally used by Harris. A Wildlife Monograph has been accepted for publication and should be available by summer 2005. Our project addressing the potential application of stable isotopes and trace elements to quantify consumption rates of whitebark pine ( Pinus albicaulis ) and cutthroat trout ( Oncorhynchus clarki ) by grizzly bears was completed. Our manuscript on consumption rates of whitebark pine has been published (Canadian Journal of Zoology 81:763-770). The manuscript on fish consumption rates was also accepted and is published in the Canadian Journal of Zoology 82:493-501. Both can be found on the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team (IGBST) website http://www.nrmsc.usgs.gov/research/igbst-home.htm. We began a new study in Grand Teton National Park evaluating habitat use both temporally and spatially between grizzly and black ( Ursus americanus ) bears. We will employ a new form of Global Positioning System (GPS) technology that incorporates a spread spectrum communication system. Spread spectrum allows for transfer of stored GPS locations from the collar to a remote receiving station. Results of our first yea r’s field season are summarized in this report. Whitebark pine (WBP) has been identified as one of the import ant fall foods of the Yellowstone grizzly bear. Previous efforts to map the distribution of WBP were for the Cumulative Effects Model. Consequently the only coverage of WBP distribution was for the grizzly bear Recovery Zone. We were successful in getting financial support through the U.S. Geological Survey Land Remote Sensing Program and Interdisciplinary Science Support Activities Project to create an ecosystem-wide map of the distribution of WBP. The results of that project are reported in Appendix A. The study team annually estimates WBP cone production on a series of transects. That information is reported annually in our reports. Concern over the long-term health of WBP prompted us to investigate the usefulness of cone counts as an indirect index of WBP health. Results of this analysis (Appendix B) indicated that cone production is too variable to serve this purpose. Consequently, we partnered with several 2 other agencies and embarked on a program to develop a long-term monitoring program directed specifically at WBP health in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE). Our team (Greater Yellowstone Whitebark Pine Monitoring Working Group) was successful in obtaining funds to develop and implement a WBP health monitoring program. Results of our first years work are presented in Appendix C. We also successfully competed for funds in 2005 and will continue to collect information on WBP health. Army cutworm moths ( Euxoa auxiliaris ) are also a very important food for a segment of the GYE grizzly bear population. Hillary Robison, graduate student at University of Nevada, Reno, is nearing completion of her program. In this report, we post her annual work summary, and abstracts of her most recently submitted publications. These include one on the levels of pesticides in cutworm moths and their potential affect on grizzly bears (Appendix D), a spatial analysis to identify army cutworm moth habitat (Appendix E), and the results of a preliminary analysis of pollen grains on the mouth parts of moths (Appendix F) to help identify which plant species are commonly fed upon. Other study team members have also been working on various aspects of grizzly bear science. Study team member Kerry Gunther hosted a workshop on habituated grizzly bears in North America. A copy of the abstract of that report can be found in Appendix G. Additionally, Kerry Gunther and Doug Smith, wolf researcher in Yellowstone National Park (YNP), reported on the interactions between gray wolves ( Canis lupus ) and female grizzly bears with young. They report that of 15 interactions between these 2 carnivores, 8 involve d females with COY. They observed 2 incidents where cubs were killed by wolves at ungulate carcasses (Appendix H). The annual reports of the IGBST summarize annual data collection. Because additional information can be obtained after publication, data summaries are subject to change. For that reason, data analyses and summaries presented in this report supersede all previously published data. The study area and sampling techniques are reported by Blanchard (1985), Mattson et al. (1991 a ), and Haroldson et al. (1998).

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming↗
USGS2003

U.S. Geological Survey Greater Everglades Science Program: 2002 Biennial Report

Introduction The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducts scientific investigations in south Florida to improve society’s understanding of the environment and assist in the sustainable use, protection, and restoration of the Everglades and other ecosystems within the region. The investigations summarized in this document have been carried out under the Greater Everglades Science Program (previously known as the South Florida Ecosystem Program), which is part of the USGS Place-Based Studies initiative. The USGS Placed-Based Studies initiative is a nationwide program that concentrates on areas with severe environmental problems. Through interdisciplinary investigations the Program provides sound scientific information on which to base informed resource management decisions. Individuals from all the USGS programs (hydrology, geology, biology, mapping) work together with other scientists to cover the diverse scientific disciplines involved in this complex and challenging task. The Greater Everglades Science Program began in 1995 as one of the initial Place-Based Studies programs and serves as a model for similar future collaborative studies. Placed-Based Studies are also being conducted in the San Francisco Bay area, Chesapeake Bay, the Platte River, Greater Yellowstone, Salton Sea, and the Mojave Desert. The South Florida Ecosystem Program is part of a coordinated federal effort, under the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force. The Task Force was started in 1993, through interagency agreement, to coordinate the efforts of the agencies within six federal departments. In 1996, statutory authority formalized the Task Force and expanded it to include tribal, state, and local governments. The Task Force conducts its activities through the South Florida Ecosystem Working Group and teams, such as the Science Coordination Team. A Science Plan and Integrated Financial Plans are established to focus efforts and prevent duplicative efforts by the agencies.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2013

Working with strainmeter data

The Plate Boundary Observatory (PBO), the geodetic component of the U.S. National Science Foundation–funded Earthscope program, includes 75 borehole and 6 laser strainmeters ( http://pbo.unavco.org ). The strainmeters are installed at several locations: on the Cascadia forearc in Washington state and on Vancouver Island, Canada; in arrays of two to nine instruments along the North American–Pacific plate boundary in California; at Mount St. Helens; and in Yellowstone National Park. For deformation signals seconds to weeks in duration, strainmeters have a resolution and a signal-to-noise ratio superior to those of seismometers and GPS. However, this high sensitivity can introduce nontectonic signals into strain data, presenting data interpretation challenges, especially for borehole strainmeters.

Eos, Earth and Space Science News↗
USGS2011

The story of the Hawaiian Volcano Observatory -- A remarkable first 100 years of tracking eruptions and earthquakes

The year 2012 marks the centennial of the Hawaiian Volcano Observatory (HVO). With the support and cooperation of visionaries, financiers, scientists, and other individuals and organizations, HVO has successfully achieved 100 years of continuous monitoring of Hawaiian volcanoes. As we celebrate this milestone anniversary, we express our sincere mahalo—thanks—to the people who have contributed to and participated in HVO’s mission during this past century. First and foremost, we owe a debt of gratitude to the late Thomas A. Jaggar, Jr., the geologist whose vision and efforts led to the founding of HVO. We also acknowledge the pioneering contributions of the late Frank A. Perret, who began the continuous monitoring of Kīlauea in 1911, setting the stage for Jaggar, who took over the work in 1912. Initial support for HVO was provided by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and the Carnegie Geophysical Laboratory, which financed the initial cache of volcano monitoring instruments and Perret’s work in 1911. The Hawaiian Volcano Research Association, a group of Honolulu businessmen organized by Lorrin A. Thurston, also provided essential funding for HVO’s daily operations starting in mid-1912 and continuing for several decades. Since HVO’s beginning, the University of Hawaiʻi (UH), called the College of Hawaii until 1920, has been an advocate of HVO’s scientific studies. We have benefited from collaborations with UH scientists at both the Hilo and Mänoa campuses and look forward to future cooperative efforts to better understand how Hawaiian volcanoes work. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has operated HVO continuously since 1947. Before then, HVO was under the administration of various Federal agencies—the U.S. Weather Bureau, at the time part of the Department of Agriculture, from 1919 to 1924; the USGS, which first managed HVO from 1924 to 1935; and the National Park Service from 1935 to 1947. For 76 of its first 100 years, HVO has been part of the USGS, the Nation’s premier Earth science agency. It currently operates under the direction of the USGS Volcano Science Center, which now supports five volcano observatories covering six U.S. areas—Hawaiʻi (HVO), Alaska and the Northern Mariana Islands (Alaska Volcano Observatory), Washington and Oregon (Cascades Volcano Observatory), California (California Volcano Observatory), and the Yellowstone region (Yellowstone Volcano Observatory). Although the National Park Service (NPS) managed HVO for only 12 years, HVO has enjoyed a close working relationship with Hawaiʻi Volcanoes National Park (named Hawaii National Park until 1961) since the park’s founding in 1916. Today, as in past years, the USGS and NPS work together to ensure the safety and education of park visitors. We are grateful to all park employees, particularly Superintendent Cindy Orlando and Chief Ranger Talmadge Magno and their predecessors, for their continuing support of HVO’s mission. HVO also works closely with the Hawaiʻi County Civil Defense. During volcanic and earthquake crises, we have appreciated the support of civil defense staff, especially that of Harry Kim and Quince Mento, who administered the agency during highly stressful episodes of Kīlauea's ongoing eruption. Our work in remote areas on Hawaiʻi’s active volcanoes is possible only with the able assistance of Hawaiʻi County and private pilots who have safely flown HVO staff to eruption sites through the decades. A special mahalo goes to David Okita, who has been HVO’s principal helicopter pilot for more than two decades. Many commercial and Civil Air Patrol pilots have also assisted HVO by reporting their observations during various eruptive events. Hawaiʻi’s news media—print, television, radio, and online sources—do an excellent job of distributing volcano and earthquake information to the public. Their assistance is invaluable to HVO, especially during times of crisis. HVO’s efforts to provide timely and accurate scientific information about Hawaiian volcanoes and earthquakes succeed only because of you, our receptive and keenly aware public. By following the activity of Hawaiʻi’s active volcanoes through our daily eruption updates posted on the HVO website, viewing HVO webcam images, reading our weekly “Volcano Watch” articles, and attending our public lectures, you help us to ensure that you can live safely with Hawaiʻi’s dynamic volcanoes. To everyone who has shared in HVO’s reaching this milestone—100 years of continuous volcano monitoring—we extend our deepest gratitude. Mahalo nui loa!

Hawai'i↗
USGS2020

Rapid early development and feeding benefits an invasive population of lake trout

Lake trout ( Salvelinus namaycush ) were discovered in Yellowstone Lake in 1994 and their population expanded dramatically despite intensive suppression. The lake is species-depauperate, with no major lake trout embryo predators. We hypothesized that without this predation threat, lake trout free embryo feeding and growth may be greater than in their native range, leading to increased survival of age-0 individuals and rapid population growth. We compared length, developmental rate, and feeding patterns of lake trout free embryos captured at a spawning site in Yellowstone Lake with free embryos captured in their native range in Lake Champlain, Vermont. More embryos were feeding, contained more food, and were significantly longer at the same developmental stages in Yellowstone Lake. With an abundance of available food and minimal threat of predation, free embryos remained on the spawning site in Yellowstone Lake later into the summer than in Lake Champlain and achieved a greater maximum length before they dispersed. Greater food consumption and associated growth likely leads to high survival of lake trout free embryos in Yellowstone Lake, contributing to rapid population growth.

New York, Quebec, Vermont, Wyoming↗