Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 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.

At least 415 records · Page 23Linked to original sources
USGS2012

National wildlife refuge visitor survey results: 2010/2011

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) collaborated with the U.S. Geological Survey to conduct a national survey of visitors regarding their experiences on national wildlife refuges. The survey was conducted to better understand visitor needs and experiences and to design programs and facilities that respond to those needs. The survey results will inform Service performance planning, budget, and communications goals. Results will also inform Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCPs), Visitor Services, and Transportation Planning processes. The survey was conducted on 53 refuges across the National Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System) to better understand visitor needs and experiences and to design programs and facilities that respond to those needs. A total of 14,832 visitors agreed to participate in the survey between July 2010 and November 2011. In all, 10,233 visitors completed the survey for a 71% response rate. This report provides a summary of visitor and trip characteristics; visitor opinions about refuges and their offerings; and visitor opinions about alternative transportation and climate change, two Refuge System topics of interest. The Refuge System, established in 1903 and managed by the Service, is the leading network of protected lands and waters in the world dedicated to the conservation of fish, wildlife and their habitats. There are 556 National Wildlife Refuges and 38 wetland management districts nationwide, encompassing more than 150 million acres. The Refuge System attracts more than 45 million visitors annually, including 25 million people per year to observe and photograph wildlife, over 9 million to hunt and fish, and more than 10 million to participate in educational and interpretation programs. Understanding visitors and characterizing their experiences on national wildlife refuges are critical elements of managing these lands and meeting the goals of the Refuge System. These combined results are based on surveying at 53 participating refuges during 2010/2011 and contain the following information: * Synopsis: Brief summary of the survey results. * Introduction: An overview of the Refuge System and the goals of the national surveying effort. * Methods: The procedures for the national surveying effort, including selecting refuges, developing the survey instrument, contacting visitors, and guidance for interpreting the results. * Survey Results: Key findings from the survey, including: - Visitor and trip characteristics - Visitors opinions about refuges - Visitor opinions about alternative transportation - Visitor opinions about climate change * Conclusion * References Individual results for each of the 53 participating refuges are available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/643/ as part of USGS Data Series 643.

Data Series↗
USGS1999

Real-time water-quality monitoring for protection of wildlife at Quivira National Wildlife Refuge, South-Central Kansas

Stream stage and discharge and the quality of water flowing from Rattlesnake Creek into the Quivira National Wildlife Refuge in south-central Kansas are being monitored by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service using an innovative, real-time monitoring approach. Continuously recorded data and data from periodic collection of water-quality samples are being used to develop surrogate relations between certain physical properties of water and chemical constituents of concern. These relations will allow resource managers to protect wildlife at the refuge by reacting quickly to significant changes in water quality.

Kansas↗
USGS2021

Science needs of southeastern grassland species of conservation concern: A framework for species status assessments

The unglaciated southeastern United States is a biodiversity hotspot, with a disproportionate amount of this biodiversity concentrated in grasslands. Like most hotspots, the Southeast is also threatened by human activities, with the total reduction of southeastern grasslands estimated as 90 percent (upwards to 100 percent for some types) and with many threats escalating today. This report summarizes the results of a multistakeholder workshop organized by the Southeastern Grasslands Initiative and the U.S. Geological Survey, held in January 2020 to provide a scientific needs assessment to help inform the Species Status Assessment (SSA) process under the U.S. Endangered Species Act, with a focus on grassland species and communities of conservation concern in the southeastern United States. This report reviews the ecology of southeastern grasslands, including influences on their origin, maintenance, and high species richness and endemism; presents findings from the workshop; and discusses science questions, hypotheses, and possibilities for future research projects to help fill key knowledge gaps. Participants in the January 2020 workshop, representing diverse expertise in various topics in southeastern grassland ecology, were tasked with identifying major threats to grassland species in the Southeast as well as potential ways to make the SSA process more efficient and effective. An underlying assumption and starting place for workshop discussion was that an ecosystem-based approach to the SSA process is more cost-efficient than a species-by-species approach, in large part because many species with similar biological requirements can be addressed by the same actions. Nevertheless, one partner in this effort, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, does require specific attention be given to taxa that have been petitioned for Federal listing, though as often as possible these taxa are considered alongside a larger group of priority taxa with an ecosystem approach. For group discussions, workshop participants followed a modified “World Café” method, a structured conversational approach for knowledge sharing. Group discussions focused on five categories of threats to grassland communities and species: (1) habitat loss, fragmentation, and disruption of functional population connectivity; (2) climate change, especially changes in temperature and precipitation, including intensity and seasonality, and impacts on soil moisture, groundwater levels, and other ecosystem parameters; (3) changes to disturbance regimes, as influenced by climate and land-use change, extinctions, and human attitudes and behaviors; (4) invasive species (not limited to nonnative species); and (5) localized or subregional impacts such as sea-level rise. In addition to group discussions, workshop participants—as well as other grassland experts who were unable to attend the workshop—completed a preworkshop survey concerning challenges and opportunities for grassland conservation. Findings reported here under each of these topics represent ideas, problems, hypotheses, and questions identified by a diverse community of grassland managers and researchers which may be addressed by future research and monitoring in southeastern grassland ecosystems to help guide science-based conservation of grassland-dependent species.

Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Lou↗
USGS2022

Analytical assessments in support of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 3-bat species status assessment

Beginning in February of 2020, researchers and staff of the United States Geological Survey (USGS), Bat Conservation International (BCI), Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, and Montana State University associated with the North American Bat Monitoring Program (NABat) collaborated with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to provide technical assistance in support of the USFWS Three Bat Species Status Assessments (SSA) including the little brown bat (MYLU, Myotis lucifugus), northern long-eared bat (MYSE, Myotis septentrionalis), and tricolored bat (PESU, Perimyotis subflavus). Analytical support for the SSA was not intended to provide interpretive results, which should therefore be considered beyond the scope of this report. Technical assistance for the SSA included facilitating the USFWS data call by educating and working directly with data contributors to manage, submit, and archive a variety of bat monitoring data in the online NABat database1 using standardized data submission templates accessible through the upload features on the NABat website. Most data collected through the USFWS data call for the SSA were submitted and stored in the NABat database. These represent the efforts of hundreds of partnering organizations across more than 200 individual NABat Partner Portal Projects. A few organizations contributed data for use in these analyses that were not submitted to the NABat database. Records submitted in response to the USFWS data call included bat capture, stationary and mobile acoustic, and internal roost count data (winter and summer). Data collated in the NABat database and used for the analyses described herein are documented (NABat 2020a, NABat 2020b, NABat 2021) and available through the NABat third party request feature.

Report↗
USGS2006

2005 annual progress report: Elk and bison grazing ecology in the Great Sand Dunes complex of lands

In 2000 the U.S. Congress authorized the expansion of the former Great Sand Dunes National Monument by establishing a new Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve in its place, and establishing the Baca National Wildlife Refuge. The establishment of Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve and the new Baca National Wildlife Refuge in the San Luis Valley (SLV), Colorado was one of the most significant land conservation actions in the western U.S. in recent years. The action was a result of cooperation between the National Park Service (NPS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Forest Service (USDA-FS), and The Nature Conservancy (TNC). The new national park, when fully implemented, will consist of 107,265 acres, the new national preserve 41,872 acres, and the new national wildlife refuge (USFWS lands) 92,180 acres (fig. 1). The area encompassed by this designation protects a number of natural wonders and features including a unique ecosystem of natural sand dunes, the entire watershed of surface and groundwaters that are necessary to preserve and recharge the dunes and adjacent wetlands, a unique stunted forest, and other valuable riparian vegetation communities that support a host of associated wildlife and bird species. When the National Park was initially established, there were concerns about overconcentrations and impacts on native plant communities of the unhunted segments of a large and possibly growing elk (Cervus elaphus) population. This led to the designation of the Preserve as a compromise solution, where the elk could be harvested. The Preserve Unit, however, will not address all the ungulate management challenges. In order to reduce the current elk population, harvests of elk may need to be aggressive. But aggressive special hunts of elk to achieve population reductions can result in elk avoidance of certain areas or elk seeking refuge in areas where they cannot be hunted, while removals of whole herd segments and abandonment or alterations of migration routes can occur (Smith and Robbins, 1994; Boyce and others, 1991). Elk may seek refuge from hunting in the newly expanded Park Unit and TNC lands where they might overconcentrate and impact unique vegetation communities. In these sites of refugia, or preferred loafing sites, elk and bison could accelerate a decline in woody riparian shrubs and trees. This decline may also be due to changes in hydrology, climatic, or dunal processes, but ungulate herbivory might exacerbate the effects of those processes. To address the questions and needs of local resource managers, a multi-agency research project was initiated in 2005 to study the ecology, forage relations, and habitat relations of elk and bison in the Great Sand Dunes–Sangre de Cristo–Baca complex of lands. Meetings and discussions of what this research should include were started in 2001 with representatives from NPS, USFWS, TNC, the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW), and USDA-FS/BLM. The final study plan was successfully funded in 2004 with research scheduled to start in 2005. The research was designed to encompass three major study elements: (1) animal movements and population dynamics, (2) vegetation and nutrient effects from ungulate herbivory, and (3) development of ecological models, using empirical data collected from the first two components, that will include estimates of elk carrying capacity and management scenarios for resource managers.

Colorado↗
USGS2008

Analysis of Streamflow Trends, Ground-Water and Surface-Water Interactions, and Water Quality in the Upper Carson River Basin, Nevada and California

Changes in land and water use and increasing development of water resources in the Carson River basin may affect flow of the river and, in turn, affect downstream water users dependent on sustained river flows to Lahontan Reservoir. To address these concerns, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Churchill County, and the Truckee-Carson Irrigation District, began a study in April 2006 to compile data on changes in land and water use, ground-water levels and pumping, streamflow, and water quality, and to make preliminary analyses of ground-water and surface-water interactions in the Carson River basin upstream of Lahontan Reservoir. The part of the basin upstream of Lahontan Reservoir is called the upper Carson River basin in this report. In 2005, irrigated agricultural land covered about 39,000 acres in Carson Valley, 3,100 acres in Dayton Valley, and 1,200 acres in Churchill Valley. Changes in land use in Carson Valley from the 1970s to 2005 included the development of about 2,700 acres of native phreatophytes, the development of 2,200 acres of irrigated land, 900 acres of land irrigated in the 1970s that appeared fallow in 2005, and the irrigation of about 2,100 acres of new agricultural land. In Dayton and Churchill Valleys, about 1,000 acres of phreatophytes and 900 acres of irrigated land were developed, about 140 acres of phreatophytes were replaced by irrigation, and about 600 acres of land irrigated in the 1970s were not irrigated in 2006. Ground-water pumping in the upper Carson River basin increases during dry years to supplement surface-water irrigation. Total annual pumping exceeded 20,000 acre-ft in the dry year of 1976, exceeded 30,000 acre-ft in the dry years from 1987 to 1992, and increased rapidly during the dry years from 1999 to 2004, and exceeded 50,000 acre-ft in 2004. As many as 67 public supply wells and 46 irrigation wells have been drilled within 0.5 mile of the Carson River. Pumping from these wells has the potential to affect streamflow of the Carson River. It is not certain, however, if all these wells are used currently. Annual streamflow of the Carson River is extremely variable, ranging from a low of about 26,000 acre-ft in 1977 to slightly more than 800,000 acre-ft in 1983 near Fort Churchill. Graphs of the cumulative annual streamflow and differences in the cumulative annual streamflow at Carson River gaging stations upstream and downstream of Carson and Dayton Valleys show an annual decrease in streamflow. The annual decrease in Carson River streamflow averaged about 47,000 acre-ft through Carson Valley, and about 11,000 acre-ft through Dayton Valley for water years 1940-2006. The decrease in streamflow through Carson and Dayton Valleys is a result of evapotranspiration on irrigated lands and losses to ground-water storage, with greater losses in Carson Valley than in Dayton Valley because of the greater area of irrigated land in Carson Valley.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2011

A national plan for assisting states, federal agencies, and tribes in managing white-nose syndrome in bats

White-nose syndrome (WNS) is a disease responsible for unprecedented mortality in hibernating bats in the northeastern U.S. This previously unrecognized disease has spread very rapidly since its discovery in January 2007, and poses a considerable threat to hibernating bats throughout North America. As WNS spreads, the challenges for understanding and managing the disease continue to increase. Given the escalating complexity of these challenges, a highly coordinated effort is required for State, Federal, and Tribal wildlife agencies, and private partners to respond effectively to WNS and conserve species of bats. The plan proposed herein details the elements that are critical to the investigation and management of WNS, identifies key action items to address stated goals, and outlines the role(s) of agencies and entities involved in this continental effort.

Report↗
USGS2013

An overview of the Southern Nevada Agency Partnership science and research synthesis

Maintaining and restoring the diverse ecosystems and resources that occur in southern Nevada in the face of rapid socio-economic and ecological change presents numerous challenged to Federal land managers. Rapid population growth since the 1980s, the land uses associated with that growth, and the interactions of those uses with the generally dry and highly variable climate result in numerous stresses to ecosystems, species, and cultural resource. In addition, climate models predict that the rate of temperature increase and, thus, changes in ecological processes, will be highest for ecosystems like the Mojave Desert. The Southern Nevada Agency Partnership (SNAP; http:www.SNAP.gov) was established in 1999 to address common issues pertaining to public lands in southern Nevada. Partners include the Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and USDA Forest Service and they work with each other, the local community, and other partners. SNAP agencies manage more than seven million acres of public lands in southern Nevada (95% of the land area). Federal land includes two national recreation areas, two national conservation area, four national wildlife refuges, 18 congressionally designated wilderness areas, five wilderness study areas, and 22 areas of critical environmental concern. The partnership's activities are mainly centered in Southern Nevada's Clark County (fig. 1.1), but lands managed by SNAP partner agencies also include portions of Lake Mead National Recreation Area in Mohave County, Arizona, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and USDA Forest Service-managed lands in Lincoln and Nye Counties, Nevada, and all lands and activities managed by the Southern Nevada District Office of the Bureau of Land Management. These lands encompass nine distinct ecosystem types (fig. 1.2), support multiple species of management concern an 17 listed species, and are rich in cultural and historic resource. This introductory executive summary discusses the Science and Research Strategy developed by the SNAP agencies, the Science and Research Report, and need for science-based management in southern Nevada.

Nevada↗
USGS2022

Ungulate migration in a changing climate—An initial assessment of climate impacts, management priorities, and science needs

Executive Summary Migratory behavior among ungulates in the Western United States occurs in response to changing forage quality and quantity, weather patterns, and predation risk. As snow melts and vegetation green-up begins in late spring and early summer, many migratory ungulates leave their winter range and move to higher elevation summer ranges to access high-quality forage and areas with vegetative cover for protection during fawning. Ungulates remain on these ranges until the fall when increasing snowfall and decreasing temperatures trigger them to migrate back to their lower elevation winter ranges. While researchers have begun to assess the effects of physical barriers such as roads and energy infrastructure on migration, less attention has been paid to understanding how changing climate conditions might affect ungulate movements and range habitats. Does earlier spring green-up make ungulates leave their winter ranges sooner? Do persistent drought conditions reduce the carrying capacity of seasonal range habitats or lead to shifts in migration pathways? These and other questions remain largely unanswered but could have cascading effects on ungulate population dynamics and migratory behavior. In February 2018, the Secretary of the Interior signed Department of the Interior Secretarial Order 3362 (SO3362), “Improving Habitat Quality in Western Big-Game Winter Range and Migration Corridors.” The order, which focuses on elk, mule deer, and pronghorn in 11 Western States, directs the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the National Park Service (NPS), and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to partner with State wildlife agencies on their priorities and objectives for identifying and conserving ungulate migration corridors and winter-range habitat. The USGS Climate Adaptation Science Centers (CASCs) were established to help managers of the Nation’s fish, wildlife, waters, and lands understand the effects of climate change and adapt to changing conditions. To support the recent Department of the Interior (DOI) emphasis on ungulate migration corridors and winter-range habitat, this report assesses current information on how climate change could affect elk, mule deer, and pronghorn migration. The report synthesizes the drivers of migration, outlines what is known about how climate change might affect these drivers, and summarizes management priorities and science needs related to ungulate migration corridors and range habitat. A review of the literature on ungulate migration shows that the core drivers of spring migration are the timing of spring green-up and snowmelt, and the core driver of fall migration is winter severity. After exploring what is known about how these drivers affect or could be affected by climate change, several pathways through which ungulate migration could be altered were identified: (1) ungulates alter migration timing to better track plant phenology or in response to changes in winter conditions; (2) ungulates change their migration route or distance traveled during migration to accommodate changes in environmental conditions; and (3) ungulate populations that are currently migratory may begin to demonstrate interannual variability in whether they migrate, depending on environmental conditions and density-dependence, and may remain resident for sets of consecutive years. Through discussions with managers, physical barriers to movement such as roads and fences were identified as a core concern. In addition, the primary research needs of States are the acquisition and analysis of data on ungulate movements, to refine delineation of winter range, summer range, and corridors, and to support a better understanding of how ungulates use these habitats. When it comes to understanding climate effects, managers were more concerned with understanding the vulnerability of winter- and summer-range habitats than the vulnerability of migration corridors because of the influence of summer and winter forage on ungulate condition and reproductive success. Managers were also concerned about how forage quality and quantity might change because of stressors such as drought, wildfire, and invasive species and how they might need to alter habitat-treatment strategies as a result. More baseline data are needed before effective projections of ungulate migration, at a West-wide scale under climate change, can be made. These data needs include (1) more clearly defined corridors and seasonal range habitats; (2) a comprehensive understanding of the ecological drivers of migration across ungulate species and populations; and (3) the identification of environmental thresholds for key variables that influence migration, above which ungulates alter migratory behavior. The CASCs have several opportunities to play a role in addressing these needs. The CASCs could initiate projects to identify past and potential future changes and trends in key variables known to affect ungulate migration, such as plant phenology, forage quality, or winter severity. However, it would be difficult to use this information to determine what those trends mean for ungulate migration due to the lack of knowledge about environmental thresholds for ungulates. Additional projects would be required to compare multiple years of movement data with key variables to define thresholds. Once available, information on environmental thresholds could be integrated with projections of key variables to forecast the likelihood that the migration routes or the distance traveled could change—another area in which the CASCs could contribute. A more immediate role for the CASCs would be to carry out synthesis projects. One such project could summarize the “state of the science” on the drivers of ungulate migration. Although there are dozens of population- and location-specific studies on this topic, collating this information could help highlight trends in migration drivers that span species and geographies: a necessary first step toward determining the extent to which migration drivers could be affected by climate change. A second project could focus on what is known about how climate variability and change affect ungulate life-histories, population dynamics, and migration in the Western United States. The goal of this effort could be to identify knowledge clusters and information gaps that require further investigation. Together, these synthesized products could focus future scientific activities on the most pressing issues of ungulate migration and climate change in the Western United States.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New↗
USGS2022

Contaminants of emerging concern in the Great Lakes: Science to inform management practices for protecting the health and integrity of wildlife populations from adverse effects: GLRI action plan I, focus area 1, goal 5

Executive Summary: Under Action Plan I (2010-2014) of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI), Federal and Academic partners began an investigation of the presence and distribution of contaminants of emerging concern (CECs) in the Great Lakes and potential impacts on fish and wildlife. The term CECs is applied to a broad range of chemicals that are currently in use but for which we currently lack good understanding of whether fish, wildlife, or humans are being exposed and/or whether negative health or environmental effects are expected if exposure occurs. Pharmaceuticals, personal care products, flame retardants, many current use pesticides, and poly- and perfluorinated chemicals are some well-known groups of CECs, but there is no definitive or comprehensive list that can be used to support the management of CECs to reduce impacts on the Great Lakes ecosystem. Four overarching goals were identified for this collaborative investigation: 1. Evaluate the sources, occurrence, and distribution of CECs across the Great Lakes Basin. 2. Examine associations between the distribution of CECs and land-use patterns. 3. Review both scientific literature and field-generated data to determine the potential for CECs to cause adverse effects on Great Lakes fish and wildlife populations. 4. Develop efficient strategies to survey and/or monitor for threats that CECs may pose in order to take effective management actions before those threats evolve into large scale impacts on Great Lakes ecosystems or the services they provide. Achievement of these goals ensures progress towards Focus Area 1: Toxic Substances and Areas of Concern from GLRI Action Plan I, Goal 5: “ The health and integrity of wildlife populations and habitat are protected from adverse chemical and biological effects associated with the presence of toxic substances in the Great Lakes Basin ”. This large-scale research effort was comprised of individual and collaborative projects from multiple federal agencies and academic institutions, involving over 85 investigators, and overseen by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 5, Great Lakes National Program Office. Partners include the United States Geological Survey, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Saint Cloud State University, the U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Key findings: 1. Contaminants of emerging concern were found throughout the monitored Great Lakes tributaries, but types and concentrations vary in association with regional land use. CECs were detected in nearly all samples collected. The type and concentration of the specific contaminants detected varied considerably among field sites and in association with land use type, such as urban, agricultural, wetland, 2 or forest. Contaminants were detected in the water column, sediment, and tissues of all species surveyed in the current work (mussels, aquatic insects, fish, and insect-eating birds). 2. There were over 20 contaminants for which CEC concentrations approached or exceeded those reported to cause toxicity in laboratory experiments. This was based on detection in water, sediments and or biota at one or more field sites. These contaminants represent compounds that warrant further investigation and monitoring with respect to potential impacts in certain areas of the Great Lakes basin. Based on the present investigation, compounds of greatest concern include: polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, associated with oil-based products and combustion of organic matter; atrazine, an herbicide; dichlorvos, an insecticide; and ibuprofen and venlafaxine, both pharmaceuticals. 3. Results suggest that mixtures of CECs presently found in most Great Lakes tributary locations surveyed may elicit subtle biological effects, but likely are not, alone, causing obvious detriment to current communities of fish and wildlife. CECs detected in the Great Lakes were associated with subtle biological effects like changes in gene expression, altered circulating glucose, etc. in both wild-caught and laboratory-reared organisms. These effects were generally not indicative of reproductive failure or mortality. However, the effects may have more serious implications when combined with other sources of stress like habitat degradation, changing climate conditions, and competition with invasive species. Due to limited historical data, it is unknown whether severe CEC-related impacts have already affected aquatic communities in waterbodies that have received long-term inputs of these contaminants. Likewise, under Action Plan I, biological effects were not necessarily evaluated at the sites where CEC concentrations exceeding laboratory toxicity thresholds were detected. As a result, strategic, ongoing surveillance and monitoring of CECs is warranted. This collaborative investigation resulted in new tools, approaches, and data that can be used to inform and support the management of CECs to reduce their impacts on Great Lakes natural resources. The following products of this research effort are available through https://communities.geoplatform.gov/glri/ or by contacting the investigators (see technical chapters found in Appendices A-F): 1. Database of CEC occurrence and concentrations in US tributary streams. The database includes CEC detections in water, sediment, and fish and wildlife tissues, and represents the most comprehensive survey of CECs in the Great Lakes Region. 2. Synopses of results and key findings. Integrated summaries of results, conclusions, and management implications of the CEC research are available through reports, topical fact sheets, and presentations. 3. Technical publications: This collaborative research effort has resulted in over 50 peer-reviewed publications, agency reports, and data releases that can be of use to resource managers, the scientific community, and members of the public. 4. Innovative tools. Innovative monitoring devices, sampling equipment, conceptual frameworks, and software applications were developed over the course of this 3 research. These tools are transferable to stakeholders via internet accessibility or via specifications, instructions, and demonstration detailed in technical publications. Hypotheses to guide CECs research under Action Plan II. Findings from 2010-2014 were used to guide further research in 2015-2018 for basin-wide surveillance of CECs and for sites warranting further study of potential biological impacts of CECs. Additional surveillance included both evaluation of additional classes of contaminants and expanded lists for chemical classes shown to be of greatest concern. Mixtures of some of the most frequently detected contaminants were also tested in laboratory studies to understand whether long term exposures to multiple contaminants may result in effects not evident from uncontrolled, short-term field experiments.

Great Lakes↗
USGS2000

Water Flows in the Necedah National Wildlife Refuge

The Necedah National Wildlife Refuge (NNWR), in Juneau County, Wisconsin (fig. 1). contains extensive wetlands areas commonly recog- nized as providing habitat and protection for migratory birds and endangered species. Because of concerns with potential changes to the water resources that supply the Refuge, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Geological Survey undertook a one-year study to characterize the water resources of the Refuge in 1998. That study, which focused on quantifying the surface water and ground-water flows into and out of the Refuge, was intended to serve as a baseline condition of water resources on the Refuge.

Wisconsin↗
USGS2018

Phase 1 studies summary of major findings of the South Bay Salt Pond Restoration Project, South San Francisco Bay, California

Executive Summary The South Bay Salt Pond Restoration Project (Project) is one of the largest restoration efforts in the United States. It is located in South San Francisco Bay of California. It is unique not only for its size—more than 15,000 acres—but also for its location adjacent to one of the nation’s largest urban areas, home to more than 4 million people (Alameda, Santa Clara, and San Mateo Counties). The Project is intended to restore and enhance wetlands in South San Francisco Bay while providing for flood management, wildlife-oriented public access, and recreation. Restoration goals of the project are to provide a mosaic of saltmarsh habitat to benefit marsh species and managed ponds to benefit waterbirds, throughout 3 complexes and 54 former salt ponds. Although much is known about the project area, significant uncertainties remain with a project of this geographic and temporal scale of an estimated 50 years to complete the restoration. For example, in order to convert anywhere from 50 to 90 percent of the existing managed ponds to saltmarsh habitat, conservation managers first enhance the habitat of managed ponds in order to increase use by waterbirds, and provide migratory, wintering, and nesting habitat for more than 90 species of waterbirds. Project managers have concluded that the best way to address these uncertainties is to carefully implement the project in phases and learn from the outcome of each phase. The Adaptive Management Plan (AMP) identifies specific restoration targets for multiple aspects of the Project and defines triggers that would necessitate some type of management action if a particular aspect is trending negatively. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) biologist Laura Valoppi served as the project Lead Scientist and oversaw implementation of the AMP in coordination with other members of the Project Management Team (PMT), comprised of representatives from the California State Coastal Conservancy, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Santa Clara Valley Water District, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. To implement the AMP, the PMT have selected and funded applied studies and monitoring projects to address key uncertainties. This information is used by the PMT to make decisions about current management of the project area and future restoration actions in order to meet project. This document summarizes the major scientific findings from studies conducted from 2009 to 2016, as part of the science program that was conducted in conjunction with Phase 1 restoration and management actions. Additionally, this report summarizes the management response to the study results under the guidance of the AMP framework and provides a list of suggested studies to be conducted in “Phase 2–A scorecard summarizing the Project’s progress toward meeting the AMP goals for a range of Project objectives.” The scoring to date indicates that the Project is meeting or exceeding expectations for sediment accretion and western snowy plover ( Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus ) recovery. There is uncertainty with respect to objectives for California gulls ( Larus californicus ), California least tern ( Sternula antillarum ), steelhead trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ), and regulatory water quality objectives. Water quality and algal blooms, specifically of the managed ponds, is indicated as trending negative. However, the vast majority of objectives are trending positive, including increased abundance for a number of bird guilds, increasing marsh habitat, maintenance of mudflats, visitor experience, estuarine fish numbers, and special-status marsh species numbers.

California↗
USGS2006

LANDFIRE: Collaboration for National Fire Fuel Assessment

The implementation of national fire management policies, such as the National Fire Plan and the Healthy Forest Restoration Act, requires geospatial data of vegetation types and structure, wildland fuels, fire risks, and ecosystem fire regime conditions. Presently, no such data sets are available that can meet these requirements. As a result, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service and the Department of the Interior's land management bureaus (Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and National Park Service (NPS)) have jointly sponsored LANDFIRE, a new research and development project. The primary objective of the project is to develop an integrated and repeatable methodology and produce vegetation, fire, and ecosystem information and predictive models for cost-effective national land management applications. The project is conducted collaboratively by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the USDA Forest Service, and The Nature Conservancy.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS1945

Tularemia, an animal-borne disease

the disease tularemia continues to be of such importance in the United States that the Fish and Wildlife Service is constantly receiving requests for information on its nature and on the procedure recommended by field representatives of the Service in their work wiht the public. Such information is summarized in this leaflet. the information on human infections presented and the recommendations made have been endorsed by the United States Public Health Service.

Wildlife Leaflet↗
USGS2017

California sea otter (Enhydra lutris nereis) census results, Spring 2017

The 2017 census of southern sea otters ( Enhydra lutris nereis ) was conducted between late April and early July along the mainland coast of central California and in April at San Nicolas Island in southern California. The 3-year average of combined counts from the mainland range and San Nicolas Island was 3,186, down by 86 sea otters from the previous year. This is the second year that the official index has exceeded 3,090, the Endangered Species Act delisting threshold identified in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Southern Sea Otter Recovery Plan (the threshold would need to be exceeded for 3 consecutive years before delisting consideration). The 5-year average trend in abundance, including both the mainland range and San Nicolas Island populations, remains positive at 2.3 percent per year. Continuing lack of growth in the range peripheries likely explains the cessation of range expansion.

California↗
USGS2014

The Caloosahatchee River Estuary: A monitoring partnership between Federal, State, and local governments, 2007-13

The tidal Caloosahatchee River and downstream estuaries have substantial environmental, recreational, and economic value for southwest Florida residents and visitors. Modifications to the Caloosahatchee River watershed have altered the predevelopment hydrology, thereby threatening the environmental health of estuaries in the area. Hydrologic monitoring of the freshwater contributions from tributaries to the tidal Caloosahatchee River and its estuaries is necessary to adequately describe the total freshwater inflow and constituent loads to the delicate estuarine system. From 2007 to 2013, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) and the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), operated a flow and salinity monitoring network at tributaries flowing into and at key locations within the tidal Caloosahatchee River. This network was designed to supplement existing long-term monitoring stations, such as W.P. Franklin Lock, also known as S–79, which are operated by the USGS in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Lee County, and the City of Cape Coral. Additionally, a monitoring station was operated on Sanibel Island from 2010 to 2013 as part of the USGS Greater Everglades Priority Ecosystem Science initiative and in partnership with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (J.N. Ding Darling National Wildlife Refuge). Moving boat water-quality surveys throughout the tidal Caloosahatchee River and downstream estuaries began in 2011 and are ongoing. Information generated by these monitoring networks has proved valuable to the FDEP for developing total maximum daily load criteria, and to the SFWMD for calibrating and verifying a hydrodynamic model. The information also supports the Caloosahatchee River Watershed Protection Plan.

Florida↗
USGS2010

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Western Region Kasatochi Volcano Coastal and Ocean Science

Alaska is noteworthy as a region of frequent seismic and volcanic activity. The region contains 52 historically active volcanoes, 14 of which have had at least one major eruptive event since 1990. Despite the high frequency of volcanic activity in Alaska, comprehensive studies of how ecosystems respond to volcanic eruptions are non-existent. On August 7, 2008, Kasatochi Volcano, in the central Aleutian Islands, erupted catastrophically, covering the island with ash and hot pyroclastic flow material. Kasatochi Island was an annual monitoring site of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge (AMNWR); therefore, features of the terrestrial and nearshore ecosystems of the island were well known. In 2009, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), AMNWR, and University of Alaska Fairbanks began long-term studies to better understand the effects of the eruption and the role of volcanism in structuring ecosystems in the Aleutian Islands, a volcano-dominated region with high natural resource values.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2005

A Science Framework for Connecticut River Watershed Sustainability

Introduction: This document outlines a research framework for water resource managers and land-use planners in the four-state Connecticut River Watershed (CRW). It specifically focuses on developing the decision-support tools and data needed by managers in the watershed. The purpose of the Science Framework is to identify critical research issues and information required to better equip managers to make decisions on desirable changes in the CRW. This Science Framework is the result of a cooperative project between the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the University of Massachusetts at Amherst (UMass-Amherst), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). The cooperative project was guided by a Science Steering Committee (SC) and included several focus groups, a 70-person workshop in September 2004, and an open collaborative process by which the workshop outcomes were synthesized, written up, and then progressively refined through peer review. This document is the product of that collaborative process.

Open-File Report↗