Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Landscape Online”

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.

51 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
USGS2009

Oil and gas development in southwestern Wyoming— Energy data and services for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative (WLCI)

The purpose of this report is to explore current oil and gas energy development in the area encompassing the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative. The Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative is a long-term science-based effort to ensure southwestern Wyoming's wildlife and habitat remain viable in areas facing development pressure. Wyoming encompasses some of the highest quality wildlife habitats in the Intermountain West. At the same time, this region is an important source of natural gas. Using Geographic Information System technology, energy data pertinent to the conservation decision-making process have been assembled to show historical oil and gas exploration and production in southwestern Wyoming. In addition to historical data, estimates of undiscovered oil and gas are included from the 2002 U.S. Geological Survey National Assessment of Oil and Gas in the Southwestern Wyoming Province. This report is meant to facilitate the integration of existing data with new knowledge and technologies to analyze energy resources development and to assist in habitat conservation planning. The well and assessment data can be accessed and shared among many different clients including, but not limited to, an online web-service for scientists and resource managers engaged in the Initiative.

Wyoming↗
USGS2010

Fish habitat degradation in U.S. reservoirs

As the median age of the thousands of large reservoirs (> 200 ha) in the United States tops 50, many are showing various signs of fish habitat degradation. Our goal was to identify major factors degrading fish habitat in reservoirs across the country, and to explore regional degradation patterns. An online survey including 14 metrics was scored on a 0 (no degradation) to 5 (high degradation) point scale by 221 fisheries scientists (92% response rate) to describe degradation in 482 reservoirs randomly distributed throughout the continental United States. The highest scored sources of degradation were lack of aquatic macrophytes (41% of the reservoirs scored as 4–5), lack or loss of woody debris (35% scored 4–5), mistimed water level fluctuations (34% scored 4–5), and sedimentation (31% scored 4–5). Factor analysis identified five primary degradation factors that accounted for most of the variability in the 14 degradation metrics. The factors reflected siltation, structural habitat, eutrophication, water regime, and aquatic plants. Three degradation factors were driven principally by in-reservoir processes, whereas the other two were driven by inputs from the watershed. A comparison across U.S. regions indicated significant geographical differences in degradation relative to the factors emphasized by each region. Reservoirs sometimes have been dismissed as unnatural and disruptive, but they are a product of public policy, a critical feature of landscapes, and they cannot be overlooked if managers are to effectively conserve river systems. Protection and restoration of reservoir habitats may be enhanced with a broader perspective that includes watershed management, in addition to in reservoir activities.

Fisheries↗
USGS2014

Assessment of suitable habitat for Phragmites australis (common reed) in the Great Lakes coastal zone

In the Laurentian Great Lakes, the invasive form of Phragmites australis (common reed) poses a threat to highly productive coastal wetlands and shorelines by forming impenetrable stands that outcompete native plants. Large, dominant stands can derail efforts to restore wetland ecosystems degraded by other stressors. To be proactive, landscape-level management of Phragmites requires information on the current spatial distribution of the species and a characterization of areas suitable for future colonization. Using a recent basin-scale map of this invasive plant’s distribution in the U.S. coastal zone of the Great Lakes, environmental data (e.g., soils, nutrients, disturbance, climate, topography), and climate predictions, we performed analyses of current and predicted suitable coastal habitat using boosted regression trees, a type of species distribution modeling. We also investigated differential influences of environmental variables in the upper lakes (Lakes Superior, Michigan, and Huron) and lower lakes (Lakes St. Clair, Erie, and Ontario). Basin-wide results showed that the coastal areas most vulnerable to Phragmites expansion were in close proximity to developed lands and had minimal topographic relief, poorly drained soils, and dense road networks. Elevated nutrients and proximity to agriculture also influenced the distribution of Phragmites . Climate predictions indicated an increase in suitable habitat in coastal Lakes Huron and Michigan in particular. The results of this study, combined with a publicly available online decision support tool, will enable resource managers and restoration practitioners to target and prioritize Phragmites control efforts in the Great Lakes coastal zone.

Great Lakes↗
USGS2026

High-resolution transboundary vegetation community maps of the Sonoran and Mojave Desert ecoregion to support critical landscape conservation planning and habitat management needs

We produced a 30-m resolution binational land cover map of Bird Conservation Region 33 (BCR 33) for the U.S. North American Bird Conservation Initiative. The region covers large portions of the Sonoran and Mojave Deserts. The map can support the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Migratory Bird Program’s recovery planning efforts and constitutes the first known binational land cover dataset spanning sections of the United States–Mexico border and using a consistent classification system for both countries. The mapped region includes 152 distinct land cover classes, covering a total area of 38,421,453 ha (148,345 mi 2 ), of which 13,148,345 ha (52,706 mi 2 ) are located in Mexico and 24,770,640 ha (95,639 mi 2 ) in the United States. We primarily used Landsat 8 (OLI) imagery, supplemented by limited ground surveys from two field campaigns, drone-based aerial data, and existing vegetation classification frameworks from both countries. The classification applied a data-fusion approach integrating 30-m Landsat 8 imagery, decadal phenology metrics from vegetation indices, and a random forest model trained mainly with datasets from a comprehensive national mapping project from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) GAP Analysis Project (GAP) and federal wildland fire agencies’ Landscape Fire and Resource Management Planning Tools (LANDFIRE) (GAP/LANDFIRE) [United States side] and the National Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI) [Mexico side] as well as land cover maps and opportunistic open-access and field observations. Mapping of the full BCR 33 region was carried out in two phases: 1) Phase I, the prototype map, covered a smaller portion of the transboundary area and identified 31 land cover classes, and 2) Phase II, the full BCR 33 map (refer to Figure 1), which resulted in 152 land cover classes. Using a Random Forest classifier, we achieved an overall prediction accuracy of 92% for the Phase I map and 87% for the Phase II full region map. This slight decrease can be attributed to working on a larger, more complex area with a greater number of land cover classes. No formal validation was conducted, aside from using a subset of the collected field observations and training data to assess model performance during and after training. The training sites were further verified using Google Earth (Google, 2026) imagery. Two undergraduate students who worked for over a year visually inspected imagery and open access public images to confirm each training site during model training using in-house developed, online, visual tools. A portion of this field training data was reserved for model validation, and the corresponding results are to be presented in later sections. The project developed an end-to-end, medium- and fine-resolution remote sensing–based data fusion mapping approach. This effort produced a map (Nagler et al., 2025) and the online tools to support a dynamic, live, online map for visualizing the transboundary vegetation communities in BCR 33. The toolset is currently hosted by the University of Arizona (UofA) Vegetation Index and Phenology (VIP) Lab to support FWS partners (https://vip.arizona.edu/viplab_data_explorer?LCM_BCR33). The online map is designed to allow rapid updates using new training, validation, or correction data, making it dynamic and maintainable. The approach we took established a framework for rapid updating and correction of land cover maps, as the model can be quickly retrained with new field observations, updated training data, or other sources. This enables dynamic mapping and change detection of the region’s vegetation. This framework is an advance in data fusion and crowdsourced mapping of complex, vulnerable regions, providing support to regional stakeholders and the wider user community. This transboundary map can inform the protection, conservation, and restoration of vegetation, habitat, and ecosystems, particularly for threatened and endangered species across the two nations using consistent and harmonized binational mapping systems. Beyond supporting land management decisions and stakeholders in the transboundary desert ecoregions, this BCR 33 mapping effort establishes a foundation for future rapid, low-cost, cross-border land cover mapping that can benefit and advance ecosystem management.

Arizona, Baja California, California, Nevada, Sina↗
USGS2018

Managing conflicts in the River of Grass

Chances are, you would not pack up and move to a new home without first researching the neighborhood, reviewing your finances, and maybe investigating schools nearby. Similarly, you would not buy the first car you find on a magazine cover without first reviewing the technical specifications, exploring your options, and perhaps taking a test drive. Even when making simple purchases online, you probably shop around, check out customer reviews, and scan seller feedback ratings. Rarely do we act on impulse alone when faced with decisions. Rather, we typically start with a vision of what we want before gathering the necessary information, weighing our options, prioritizing our values, and evaluating possible tradeoffs. In making choices that range from lighthearted to life-changing, we use this commonsense strategy every day of our lives. Environmental decision-making is no different. For decades, natural resource managers faced with complicated problems have made decisions by breaking them into smaller components that are easier to approach. And like our day-to day decisions, the process is ideally guided by a shared vision of the future. However, it can become complicated when multiple, seemingly disparate views on what the future should hold emerge. As Lewis Carroll once wrote, “If you don’t know where you are going, any road will get you there.” Divining a vision of the future for the Florida Everglades and making supporting decisions is a complex undertaking. But unlike Alice thrust through the looking glass, we have tools and techniques to help us make sense of it all. The application of tools to help decision-making can move us closer to the successful restoration of this imperiled landscape.

Florida↗
USGS2015

Sea-level rise modeling handbook: Resource guide for coastal land managers, engineers, and scientists

Global sea level is rising and may accelerate with continued fossil fuel consumption from industrial and population growth. In 2012, the U.S. Geological Survey conducted more than 30 training and feedback sessions with Federal, State, and nongovernmental organization (NGO) coastal managers and planners across the northern Gulf of Mexico coast to evaluate user needs, potential benefits, current scientific understanding, and utilization of resource aids and modeling tools focused on sea-level rise. In response to the findings from the sessions, this sea-level rise modeling handbook has been designed as a guide to the science and simulation models for understanding the dynamics and impacts of sea-level rise on coastal ecosystems. The review herein of decision-support tools and predictive models was compiled from the training sessions, from online research, and from publications. The purpose of this guide is to describe and categorize the suite of data, methods, and models and their design, structure, and application for hindcasting and forecasting the potential impacts of sea-level rise in coastal ecosystems. The data and models cover a broad spectrum of disciplines involving different designs and scales of spatial and temporal complexity for predicting environmental change and ecosystem response. These data and models have not heretofore been synthesized, nor have appraisals been made of their utility or limitations. Some models are demonstration tools for non-experts, whereas others require more expert capacity to apply for any given park, refuge, or regional application. A simplified tabular context has been developed to list and contrast a host of decision-support tools and models from the ecological, geological, and hydrological perspectives. Criteria were established to distinguish the source, scale, and quality of information input and geographic datasets; physical and biological constraints and relations; datum characteristics of water and land components; utility options for setting sea-level rise and climate change scenarios; and ease or difficulty of storing, displaying, or interpreting model output. Coastal land managers, engineers, and scientists can benefit from this synthesis of tools and models that have been developed for projecting causes and consequences of sea-level change on the landscape and seascape.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2024

Assessing spatial variability of nutrients, phytoplankton, and related water-quality constituents in the California Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta at the landscape scale—2018 high resolution mapping surveys

Executive Summary This study examined the abundance and distribution of nutrients and phytoplankton in the tidal aquatic environments of the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta (Delta) and Suisun Bay, comprising three spatial surveys conducted in May, July, and October of 2018 that used continuous underway high frequency sampling and measurements onboard a high-speed boat to characterize spatial variation across the extent of the Delta. The method used involves simultaneously collecting information about the concentration and spatial distribution of all major nutrient forms with analogous information about the major classes of phytoplankton and associated water-quality conditions. The results showed substantial variation across space and time, providing an unprecedented snapshot of the dynamic environmental processes that shape the ways nutrients interact with and affect aquatic habitats in the Delta. The purposes of this study were to improve our understanding of how hydrodynamics, landscape features, and aquatic primary productivity interact to drive nutrient cycling and transport in the Delta and to provide insights into the underlying processes most directly responsible for the conditions at the time of this study, and thus into the range of conditions that may be expected following the wide array of prospective future changes to the Delta. One major anticipated change at the time of this study was the planned upgrade to the Sacramento Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant, but the study also informs our understanding of potential effects from other changes to the Delta, such as those caused by other nutrient-management actions, flow actions, large-scale wetland restoration, drought, flood, levee failure, and changes to water management. Nutrient loading is the primary driver of nutrient concentrations in the Delta, but several other major drivers interact to shape their distribution and effects: geomorphology, hydrodynamics, landscape features, and aquatic productivity. Hydrodynamics affect timescales of transport and dilution of nutrient loads in the Delta. During transit through the system, channel geometry, tidal mixing, and water exports affect hydrodynamics in diverse ways that influence water-residence and transport times, thereby markedly affecting the range of times during which natural internal cycling can alter nutrient concentrations and forms. Channel geometry and location shape tidal energy and river currents into these observed dynamics. Interactions with Delta aquatic landscapes such as herbaceous tidal marsh, submerged aquatic vegetation, and large expanses of intertidal or subtidal sediments (all highly productive landscapes) exert demand on available nutrient supplies but can also simultaneously transform and generate nutrients. Finally, while phytoplankton require nutrients to sustain production and thus are a potential nutrient sink, the amount and form of nutrients also can influence the occurrence of harmful algal blooms (HABs) that adversely affect aquatic organisms as well as affect the occurrence of beneficial algal blooms that result in production of algae that are favorable for imperiled Delta pelagic aquatic food webs. The surveys revealed a complex mosaic of spatial variation, with nutrient concentrations varying from near zero to well above concentrations considered eutrophic; nutrient concentrations were more often related to the extent of hydrologic transport and mixing than to specific geographic locations or to specific landscape features. Similarly, the surveys identified phytoplankton abundance ranging from near detection to the level of large phytoplankton blooms, with large variation in phytoplankton community composition. Although the study occurred during a period of low bloom activity, phytoplankton productivity appeared to be the strongest potential sink for inorganic nutrients in the Delta, indicating that it is a larger control on nutrient concentrations and distribution than previously understood. Cycling and transformation within the water column only appeared to substantially lower total nutrient concentrations at the longest estimated transport timescales. Contrary to expectations, we did not observe substantial nutrient depletion near landscape-scale features such as open-water habitats, submerged aquatic vegetation beds, extensive wetlands, or exposed sediments, indicating that these habitat types did not act as major sinks for nutrients in the Delta during these surveys. These results indicated that nutrient reduction efforts may have the greatest effect on pelagic phytoplankton productivity in the more productive reaches of the Delta and estuary, but these effects are unlikely to be magnified by changes to nutrient loss within the Delta over conceivable changes in flow conditions, Delta water management actions, or large-scale wetland restoration activities. Nevertheless, local processes were shown to cause substantial loss, and thus integrating of nutrient effects with other indicators of aquatic habitat conditions will help inform planning future actions at specific sites. Finally, we note that the primary contribution of this study was intended to be the survey data themselves. Aside from the results highlighted in this report, the surveys are a benchmark against which future environmental change may be evaluated, including changes to nutrient management or water exports, drought, large-scale wetland restoration, and climate change. Further, although we highlight some of the main findings from the surveys in this report, the necessarily limited scope precludes examination of many topics for which these surveys may be highly informative. To facilitate the utility of these data to stakeholders, managers, and researchers, we have released the data online (Bergamaschi and others, 2020) and created an online data exploration portal ( https:​//ca.water​.usgs.gov/​bay-​delta/​2018-​delta-​wide-​mapping-​surveys.html ) where users may query the surveys in a variety of ways to test hypotheses, examine relationships, assess spatial trends, and download data. The data exploration portal is intended to be an immersive experience that allows users to gain greater understanding of the complex interactions that shape Delta aquatic environments. This report is intended as a companion to the portal, allowing the reader to challenge and further explore the highlighted findings. This study was a collaboration between the U.S. Geological Survey and the Delta Regional Monitoring Program, with additional funding provided from U.S. Geological Survey Cooperative Matching Funds Program.

California↗
USGS2024

Annotated bibliography of scientific research relevant to oil and gas reclamation best management practices in the western United States, published from 1969 through 2020

Integrating recent scientific knowledge into management decisions supports effective natural resource management and can lead to better resource outcomes. However, finding and accessing scientific knowledge can be time consuming and costly. To assist in this process, the U.S. Geological Survey has created a series of annotated bibliographies on topics of management concern for lands in the western United States (U.S.). Oil and gas development on public lands is a long-standing and substantial component of local and regional economies and has expanded in recent decades, particularly on public lands in the western U.S. This development is associated with extensive networks of pipelines, roads, and processing facilities, across which reclamation is Federally mandated following initial well pad development (“interim” reclamation) and once resource extraction is complete (“final” reclamation). Reclamation is critical for recovering ecological services to energy-affected lands, including vegetation productivity, wildlife habitat, water and air quality, and soil stability (for example, resistance to wind and water erosion). However, reclamation of oil and gas affected lands in the western U.S. has proved challenging due to an array of regulatory and environmental factors, such as minimally developed soils, short growing seasons, herbivory, high winds, invasive species, rugged terrain, and in particular, arid climates associated with low total precipitation, high evapotranspiration rates, and highly variable precipitation patterns. We compiled and summarized journal articles, government reports, technical reports, proceedings, and theses and dissertations relevant to oil and gas reclamation. We constrained our search to products published on or before December 31, 2020 but did not limit our search by a starting date; the earliest product resulting from this effort was published in March 1969. Second, we manually scanned the last 15 years (2005-2020) of tables of contents in journals, bibliographies, and proceedings of which we were aware would contain articles highly relevant to this bibliography. We carried out the search for these products through multiple means: (1) performing a structured search of two reference databases, (2) examining articles published since 2005 in highly relevant scientific journals and conference proceedings, and (3) reviewing additional material suggested by authors of products identified in steps 1 and 2. Our search was intentionally broad in order to identify as much relevant work as possible, much of which is professionally applied and tested within the industry of oil and gas reclamation, but which remains unpublished in scientific journals. We refined the initial list of products by removing: (1) duplicates, (2) products not written in English, (3) products that were not relevant to the arid ecosystems of western North America, (4) products that were not released as research, data products, or review articles in journals or as formal scientific reports, and (5) products with data which were not relevant to reclamation of oil and gas-affected lands, or for which the study did not present new data, findings, or syntheses relevant to reclamation of oil and gas-affected lands. We summarized each product using a consistent structure (background, objectives, methods, location, findings, and implications) and assigned standardized management topics to each. Management topics are intended to aid online searching within the bibliography and are described in more detail in the Methods Section of this report; they include what type of disturbance the product addresses (well pads, mining, pipelines), what aspect of oil and gas reclamation they pertain to (practices, standards, monitoring), what type of data are present in the product (for instance soil or vegetation recovery data), and an indication if the product were from a source other than a published, peer-reviewed outlet (such as dissertations or unpublished professional reports – these are identified as grey literature). The review process for this annotated bibliography included an initial internal colleague review of each summary, requesting input on each summary from an author of the original product, and a formal peer-review. Our initial searches resulted in 3,197 total products, of which 290 met our criteria for inclusion. “Reclamation Practices” is by far the management topic most addressed, followed by “Reclamation Monitoring,” for example, products assessing what and how monitoring methods are used to track and measure reclamation outcome. This document may be accessed at https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20231068 or from the U.S. Geological Survey Publication Warehouse ( https://pubs.usgs.gov/ ). The 1-page product summaries herein will also be used to create a bibliography at https://apps.usgs.gov/science-for-resource-managers that includes links to each original product, where available, and in which subject matter will be searchable by topic, location, and year. The studies compiled and summarized here may inform planning and management actions that seek to reclaim landscapes across the western U.S. which have been affected by oil and gas development.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2013

Data entry module and manuals for the Land Treatment Digital Library

Across the country, public land managers make decisions each year that influence landscapes and ecosystems within their jurisdictions. Many of these decisions involve vegetation manipulations, which often are referred to as land treatments. These treatments include removal or alteration of plant biomass, seeding of burned areas, application of herbicides, and other activities. Data documenting these land treatments usually are stored at local management offices in various formats. Therefore, anyone interested in the types and effects of land treatments across multiple jurisdictions must first assemble the information, which can be difficult if data discovery and organization involve multiple local offices. A centralized system for storing and accessing the data helps inform land managers when making policy and management considerations and assists scientists in developing sampling designs and studies. The Land Treatment Digital Library (LTDL) was created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) as a comprehensive database incorporating tabular data, documentation, photographs, and spatial data about land treatments in a single system. It was developed over a period of several years and refined based on feedback from partner agencies and stakeholders. Currently, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land treatment data are being entered by USGS personnel as part of a memorandum of understanding between the USGS and BLM. The LTDL has a website maintained by the USGS Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center where LTDL data can be viewed https://www.usgs.gov/apps/ltdl . The resources and information provided in this data series allow other agencies, organizations, and individuals to download an empty, stand-alone LTDL database to individual or networked computers. Data entered in these databases may be submitted to the USGS for possible inclusion in the online LTDL. Multiple computer programs are used to accomplish the objective of the LTDL. The support of an information-technology specialist or professionals familiar with Microsoft Access™, ESRI’s ArcGIS™, Python, Adobe Acrobat Professional™, and computer settings is essential when installing and operating the LTDL. After the program is operational, a critical element for successful data entry is an understanding of the difference between database tables and forms, and how to edit data in both formats. Complete instructions accompany the program, and they should be followed carefully to ensure the setup and operation of the database goes smoothly.

Data Series↗
USGS2009

Terrestrial Ecosystems - Topographic Moisture Potential of the Conterminous United States

As part of an effort to map terrestrial ecosystems, the U.S. Geological Survey has generated topographic moisture potential classes to be used in creating maps depicting standardized, terrestrial ecosystem models for the conterminous United States, using an ecosystems classification developed by NatureServe. A biophysical stratification approach, developed for South America and now being implemented globally, was used to model the ecosystem distributions. Substrate moisture regimes strongly influence the differentiation and distribution of terrestrial ecosystems, and therefore topographic moisture potential is one of the key input layers in this biophysical stratification. The method used to produce these topographic moisture potential classes was based on the derivation of ground moisture potential using a combination of computed topographic characteristics (CTI, slope, and aspect) and mapped National Wetland Inventory (NWI) boundaries. This method does not use climate or soil attributes to calculate relative topographic moisture potential since these characteristics are incorporated into the ecosystem model though other input layers. All of the topographic data used for this assessment were derived from the USGS 30-meter National Elevation Dataset (NED ) including the National Compound Topographic Index (CTI). The CTI index is a topographically derived measure of slope for a raster cell and the contributing area from upstream raster cells, and thus expresses potential for water flow to a point. In other words CTI data are 'a quantification of the position of a site in the local landscape', where the lowest values indicate ridges and the highest values indicate stream channels, lakes and ponds. These CTI values were compared to independent estimates of water accumulation by obtaining geospatial data from a number of sample locations representing two types of NWI boundaries: freshwater emergent wetlands and freshwater forested/shrub wetlands. Where these shorelines (the interface between the NWI wetlands and adjacent land) occurred, the CTI values were extracted and a histogram of their statistical distributions was calculated. Based on an evaluation of these histograms, CTI thresholds were developed to separate periodically saturated or flooded land, mesic uplands (moderately moist), and uplands. After the range of CTI values for these three different substrate moisture regimes was determined, the CTI values were grouped into three initial topographic moisture potential classes. As a final step in the generation of this national data layer, the uplands classification was subdivided into either very dry uplands or dry uplands. Very dry uplands were defined as uplands with relatively steep, south-facing slopes, and identification of this class was based on the slope and aspect datasets derived from the NED. The remaining uplands that did not meet these additional criteria were simply re-classified as dry uplands. The final National Topographic Moisture Potential dataset for the conterminous United States contains four classes: periodically saturated or flooded land (CTI = 18.5), mesic uplands (12 =< CTI < 18.5), dry uplands (CTI < 12), and very dry uplands (CTI < 12, Slope > 24 degrees and 91 degrees =< Aspect =< 314 degrees). This map shows a smoothed and generalized image of the four topographic moisture potential classes. Additional information about this map and any of the data developed for the ecosystems modeling of the conterminous United States is available online at http://rmgsc.cr.usgs.gov/ecosystems/.

Scientific Investigations Map↗
USGS2019

Simulation of water availability in the Southeastern United States for historical and potential future climate and land-cover conditions

A study was conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Gulf Coastal Plains and Ozarks Landscape Conservation Cooperative (GCPO LCC) and the Department of the Interior Southeast Climate Adaptation Science Center, to evaluate the hydrologic response of a daily time step hydrologic model to historical observations and projections of potential climate and land-cover change for the period 1952–2099. The model simulations were used to compute the potential changes in hydrologic response and streamflow statistics across the Southeastern United States, using historical observations of climate and streamflow. Thirteen downscaled general circulation models with four representative concentration pathways were used to represent a range of potential future changes in climate (a total of 45 future simulations) from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5. The streamflow statistics were selected to describe streamflow conditions that may be most useful in defining the suitability for each river or stream to support sustaining populations of priority aquatic species across the GCPO LCC. An application of the Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System (included as part of the USGS National Hydrologic Model) was used to develop the hydrologic simulations. The results showed increases in air temperature across the study area, with the highest increases occurring in the northern part of the study area during July to September. The results showed a mix of increases and decreases in precipitation accumulation across the study area and across seasons, with decreases in precipitation accumulation across all seasons for the southwestern part of the study area. Actual evapotranspiration decreased for the southeastern part of the study area and increased for the northwestern part of the study area. The results showed general decreases in runoff across the study area, with increases in runoff in areas surrounding large metropolitan regions where potential future increases in impervious area occur. Results from a statistical analysis (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test) showed that the downscaled general circulation models generally have more skill in producing historical streamflow statistics in the duration and magnitude categories and less skill in producing historical streamflow statistics in the frequency, rate of change, and timing categories for this study area. The potential changes in the streamflow statistics and the results of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test are available through the GCPO LCC Conservation Planning Atlas, an online science-based mapping platform built specifically for land managers and planners.

Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kan↗
USGS2008

U.S. Geological Survey Karst Interest Group Proceedings, Bowling Green, Kentucky, May 27-29, 2008

*INTRODUCTION AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS* Karst aquifer systems are present throughout parts of the United States and some of its territories. The complex depositional environments that form carbonate rocks combined with post-depositional tectonic events and the diverse climatic regimes under which these rocks were formed result in unique hydrologic systems. The dissolution of calcium carbonate and the subsequent development of distinct and beautiful landscapes, caverns, and springs have resulted in some karst areas of the United States being designated as national or state parks and commercial caverns. Karst aquifers and landscapes that form in tropical areas, such as the north coast of Puerto Rico, differ greatly from karst areas in more arid climates, such as central Texas or western South Dakota. Many of these public and private lands contain unique flora and fauna associated with the hydrologic systems in these karst areas. As a result, multiple Federal, State, and local agencies have an interest in the study of karst terrains. Carbonate sediments and rocks (limestone and dolomite) are composed of greater than 50 percent carbonate minerals and the predominant carbonate mineral is calcium carbonate or limestone (CaCO3). Unlike terrigenous clastic sedimentation, the depositional processes that produce carbonate rocks are complex, involving both biological and physical processes. These depositional processes impact greatly the development of permeability of the sediments. Carbonate minerals readily dissolve or precipitate depending on the chemistry of the water flowing through the rock, thus the study of both marine and meteoric diagenesis of carbonate sediments is multidisciplinary. Even with a better understanding of the depositional environment and subsequent diagenesis, the dual porosity nature of karst aquifers presents challenges to scientists attempting to study ground-water flow and contaminant transport. Many of the major springs and aquifers in the United States are developed in carbonate rocks and karst areas. These aquifers and the springs that discharge from them, serve as major water-supply sources and as unique biological habitats. Commonly, there is competition for the water resources of karst aquifers, and urban development in karst areas can impact the ecosystem and water quality of these aquifers. The concept for developing a Karst Interest Group evolved from the November 1999 National Ground-Water Meeting of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Water Resources Division. As a result, the Karst Interest Group was formed in 2000. The Karst Interest Group is a loose-knit grass-roots organization of USGS employees devoted to fostering better communication among scientists working on, or interested in, karst hydrology studies. The mission of the Karst Interest Group is to encourage and support interdisciplinary collaboration and technology transfer among USGS scientists working in karst areas. Additionally, the Karst Interest Group encourages cooperative studies between the different disciplines of the USGS and other Department of Interior agencies and university researchers or research institutes. The first Karst Interest Group workshop was held in St. Petersburg, Florida, February 13-16, 2001, in the vicinity of karst features of the Floridan aquifer system. The proceedings of that first meeting, Water-Resources Investigations Report 01-4011 are available online at: http://water.usgs.gov/ogw/karst/ The second Karst Interest Group workshop was held August 20-22, 2002, in Shepherdstown, West Virginia, in close proximity to the carbonate aquifers of the northern Shenandoah Valley. The proceedings of the second workshop were published in Water-Resources Investigations Report 02-4174, which is available online at the previously mentioned website. The third workshop of the Karst Interest Group was held September, 12-15, 2005, in Rapid City, South Dakota, which is in close proximity to karst features

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2014

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

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

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2017

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

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

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2016

U.S. Geological Survey science for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative—2015 annual report

This is the eighth annual report highlighting U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) science and decision-support activities conducted for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative (WLCI). The activities address specific management needs identified by WLCI partner agencies. In 2015, USGS scientists continued 24 WLCI projects in 5 categories: (1) acquiring and analyzing resource-condition data to form a foundation for understanding and monitoring landscape conditions and projecting changes; (2) using new technologies to improve the scope and accuracy of landscape-scale monitoring and assessments, and applying them to monitor indicators of ecosystem conditions and the effectiveness of on-the-ground habitat projects; (3) conducting research to elucidate the mechanisms that drive wildlife and habitat responses to changing land uses; (4) managing and making accessible the large number of databases, maps, and other products being developed; and (5) coordinating efforts among WLCI partners, helping them to use USGS-developed decision-support tools, and integrating WLCI outcomes with future habitat enhancement and research projects. Of the 24 projects, 21 were ongoing, including those that entered new phases or more in-depth lines of inquiry, 2 were new, and 1 was completed. A highlight of 2015 was the WLCI science conference sponsored by the USGS, Bureau of Land Management, and National Park Service in coordination with the Wyoming chapter of The Wildlife Society. Of 260 participants, 41 were USGS professionals representing 13 USGS science centers, field offices, and Cooperative Wildlife Research Units. Major themes of USGS presentations included using new technologies for developing more efficient research protocols for modeling and monitoring natural resources, researching effects of energy development and other land uses on wildlife species and habitats of concern, and modeling species distributions, population trends, habitat use, and effects of land-use changes. There was also a special session on the effectiveness of Wyoming’s Sage-Grouse Executive Order. Combined, USGS presentations provided WLCI partners with a wealth of information and conservation tools. The project completed in 2015 yielded an index of important agricultural lands in the WLCI region. The index improves upon existing measures of agricultural productivity and provides planners and managers with additional values to consider when making decisions about land use and conservation actions. The two new projects include an analysis of satellite imagery to quantify sagebrush productivity and mortality, and an evaluation of how groundwater and small streams interact in the upper Green River Basin. Initiated in response to concern among WLCI partners that large areas of sagebrush appear to have died recently, the sagebrush study objectives are to assess effects of these mortality events on overall sagebrush ecosystem productivity, evaluate the feasibility of using satellite imagery to detect patterns in sagebrush mortality over time, and identify factors driving these mortality events. The groundwater-streamflow interaction study is being conducted by hydrologists and fish ecologists to better understand how groundwater-streamflow interactions are affected by energy-resource development and how native fish communities are affected by these factors. Expected outcomes of both new projects will provide WLCI partners with additional information and decision-support tools. Highlights of ongoing science foundation activities included simulations of nine alternative build-out scenarios for oil and gas development and an associated online fact sheet that explains how the simulations were conducted, with an applied example for the Atlantic Rim. Also completed in 2015 was an update of the USGS online inventory of mineral resources data, and publication of a USGS uranium resource survey for the WLCI region. Combined, the outcomes of this work provide decisionmakers and managers with important baseline information for existing and (or) future planning and monitoring efforts. Terrestrial monitoring activities in 2015 emphasized the use of satellite data in combination with other technologies and field data to monitor, assess, and (or) forecast distribution patterns and (or) trends in sagebrush ecosystems, seasonal and migration stopover habitats used by mule deer and elk, and semi-arid aspen woodlands. Several professional papers detailing new monitoring models and results have been published. Combined, this and related work will help managers understand distribution patterns and trends among priority habitats, identify areas in need of restoration or conservation, and monitor the effectiveness of habitat-management actions. Aquatic monitoring activities entailed not only the new groundwater-streamflow interaction study already mentioned, but also continued monitoring with streamgages paired with nearby wells in the Green River Basin to assess groundwater effects on streamflow and surface water temperatures. A map that portrays groundwater levels and general direction of flow in the Green River Basin was published as well . Overall, outcomes of USGS hydrological research and monitoring will inform WLCI partners about water resources in the WLCI region and help to explain fish-community responses to energy-resource development. In 2015, USGS terrestrial wildlife ecologists continued to make crucial strides towards better understanding wildlife species responses to energy-resource development and other land-use changes. This body of research includes six taxa that require or heavily depend on sagebrush habitats: sage-grouse, pygmy rabbits, 3 songbird species, and mule deer. Native fish communities are also being evaluated. Approaches include modeling and mapping wildlife species distributions, abundances, and trends; using satellite and other technologies to track wildlife seasonal movements; conducting successive phases of research that build on the knowledge gained through prior phases to reveal the specific factors or thresholds that drive population- or individual-level responses to changes; and conducting population viability analyses. Additionally, wildlife habitat association models for pygmy rabbit and sage-grouse were combined with the oil and gas build-out scenarios to project species responses to alternative energy development scenarios. Outcomes of the wildlife response research are helping decisionmakers and managers identify specific factors that contribute to species population trends, the potential for spatial overlap between important wildlife habitats and proposed energy-resource development, locations of priority habitats for restoration and conservation, and more. Data and WLCI Web site management highlights of 2015 included not only ongoing software upgrades, but also an update of the datasets displayed in two of the online products developed for the WLCI effort: (1) a map of 15,532 oil and natural gas well pad scars and other features associated with oil and gas extraction, and (2) a map of oil and gas, oil shale, uranium, and solar energy production, both for southwestern Wyoming. In addition, a map viewer was developed for a previously published map of coal and wind production in relation to sage-grouse distribution and core management areas in southwestern Wyoming. Combined, these maps place valuable decision-support tools in the hands of WLCI partners. The USGS coordination efforts on behalf of the WLCI in 2015 included significant work on planning and executing the WLCI science conference. They also included ongoing efforts to support Local Project Development Teams and the WLCI Coordination Team (CT) with developing conservation priorities and strategies, identifying priority areas for future conservation actions, supporting the evaluation and ranking of conservation projects, and evaluating the ways in which proposed habitat projects relate to WLCI priorities. In 2015, the USGS also assisted the WLCI CT with updating the WLCI Conservation Action Plan.

Wyoming↗