Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Information Circular”

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 559 records · Page 31Linked to original sources
USGS2025

An interagency perspective on improving consistency and transparency of land use and land cover mapping

Executive Summary Geospatial products of land use and land cover are broadly used in many applications. For example, the annual national greenhouse gas inventory uses the National Land Cover Database, the Coastal Change Analysis Program, Landscape Fire and Resource Management Planning Tools, the Forest Inventory and Analysis, and the National Resources Inventory to represent the land use and management base of the United States and attribute sources and sinks of greenhouse gas emissions. Federally produced land use and land cover datasets for the United States, including those from the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium, set the foundation for developing and informing applications such as land change, conservation, greenhouse gas monitoring, urban planning, agricultural production, ecosystem functions, and water quantity and use. No single land use and land cover product is optimal for all land use and land cover applications. Approaches for defining and mapping land use and land cover classes differ across Federal map products, reflecting the tailoring of product specifications to match specific agency needs. These differing approaches present a challenge when attempting to integrate and harmonize multiple land use and land cover products into single analysis or application frameworks. Nuanced understanding of how these products are designed and produced may not be immediately evident to users; however, the availability of a diverse suite of products also represents an opportunity, providing multiple approaches for observing landscape change. In response to the National Strategy to Advance an Integrated U.S. Greenhouse Gas Measurement, Monitoring, and Information System, this Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium-led interagency report presents (1) the current status of U.S. Federal land use and land cover products (as of May 2024), (2) existing synergies and integration among these federally produced land use and land cover products, (3) inherent challenges of creating a single consistent framework, and (4) strategies for collectively tackling these challenges to improve coordination and collaboration among data producers and facilitate the adoption of land use and land cover products for greenhouse gas monitoring and a variety of other applications.

Circular↗
USGS2015

Restoration handbook for sagebrush steppe ecosystems with emphasis on greater sage-grouse habitat—Part 1. Concepts for understanding and applying restoration

Sagebrush steppe ecosystems in the United States currently occur on only about one-half of their historical land area because of changes in land use, urban growth, and degradation of land, including invasions of non-native plants. The existence of many animal species depends on the existence of sagebrush steppe habitat. The greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ) is a landscape-dependent bird that requires intact habitat and combinations of sagebrush and perennial grasses to exist. In addition, other sagebrush-obligate animals also have similar requirements and restoration of landscapes for greater sage-grouse also will benefit these animals. Once sagebrush lands are degraded, they may require restoration actions to make those lands viable habitat for supporting sagebrushobligate animals. This restoration handbook is the first in a three-part series on restoration of sagebrush ecosystems. In Part 1, we discuss concepts surrounding landscape and restoration ecology of sagebrush ecosystems and greater sage-grouse that habitat managers and restoration practitioners need to know to make informed decisions regarding where and how to restore specific areas. We will describe the plant dynamics of sagebrush steppe ecosystems and their responses to major disturbances, fire, and defoliation. We will introduce the concepts of ecosystem resilience to disturbances and resistance to invasions of annual grasses within sagebrush steppe. An introduction to soils and ecological site information will provide insights into the specific plants that can be restored in a location. Soil temperature and moisture regimes are described as a tool for determining resilience and resistance and the potential for various restoration actions. Greater sage-grouse are considered landscape birds that require large areas of intact sagebrush steppe; therefore, we describe concepts of landscape ecology that aid our decisions regarding habitat restoration. We provide a brief overview of restoration techniques for sage-grouse habitat restoration. We conclude with a description of the critical nature of monitoring for adaptive management of sagebrush steppe restoration at landscape- and project-specific levels.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Neb↗
USGS2018

Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program—2017 year in review

The Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program was involved in a number of notable events during 2017, many concerning our personnel. Dr. Barry Grand left his position as Leader of the Alabama Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit to become the Cooperative Units Program Supervisor for the South, replacing Dr. Kevin Whalen who took over as Supervisor for the West. We welcomed Dr. Sarah Converse who left the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center to become Leader of the Washington Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit. Dr. Amanda Rosenberger joined the Tennessee Cooperative Fishery Research Unit as Assistant Leader, transferring from the Missouri Cooperative Unit. Dr. Scott Carleton left his position as Assistant Unit Leader in New Mexico to become Chief of the Region 2 Migratory Bird Program of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. We said farewell to many colleagues who retired. Their departure is bittersweet as we wish them health, happiness, and wellness in retirement. We will miss their companionship and the extraordinary contributions they have made to the Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program and conservation. The Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program has a record high number of vacant scientist positions due to a combination of retirements and base funding short-falls. These issues are affecting our ability to meet cooperator needs. Yet, we remain highly productive. For example, this year we released a report ( https://doi.org/10.3133/cir1427 ) containing abstracts of nearly 600 of our research projects, covering thematic areas ranging from advanced technologies to wildlife diseases. We provided highly competent, trained scientists and natural resource managers for our cooperators’ workforce. We delivered technical training and guidance to professional practitioners. We provided critical information to cooperators for decisions on species status assessments and management of species of greatest conservation need. This year we had an active presence at major national meetings, including the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference where we co-sponsored a workshop on continuing education as a means to bridge the gap between science and management. During the coming year, with support from the U.S. Geological Survey and our cooperators, we intend to reduce the number of vacancies in the program. It will take time and active support of our cooperators to get back to full strength, but I am committed to this goal and encouraged by the resolve of our partners. We look forward to an even more productive year in 2018!

Circular↗
USGS1973

A review of benthic faunal surveys in San Francisco Bay

During the past 60 years, considerable effort has been expended in studies of the relations of the biotic community and physicochemical characteristics of San Francisco Bay water. In very recent years these studies have emphasized the relations between the 'state of health' of bottom-living invertebrates (the benthos) and the levels of pollutants in the bay. Benthic organisms, generally sessile, are unable to escape deleterious environmental changes, and they reflect these changes in alterations of normal species composition of assemblages and species abundance. Data that expands understanding of these relations in urbanized areas such as San Francisco Bay are critical. Because of the implications of such data in control of water quality, the U.S. Geological Survey undertook a review of the results and major conclusions of San Francisco Bay benthic surveys. The size and species composition of faunal assemblages are largely controlled by the salinity of the water, the texture of the bottom sediments, and locally by wastes discharged into the bay. Efforts to describe the structure and function of benthic communities of the bay and to quantify the effects of waste discharge on them have been hampered by inconsistent and often faulty sampling methodology and species identification. Studies made show a lack of information on the normal life processes of the organisms concerned. The diversity index (a mathematical expression of the number of kinds of organisms present at a location), commonly used to describe the 'health' of the benthic community, has been employed without regard for the need for standardizing methodology and species identifications or for understanding natural biological processes that affect such mathematical indices. There are few reliable quantitative data on the distribution of benthic organisms in San Francisco Bay with which future assessments of the 'health' of the benthic community might be compared. Methods for study of the benthos must be standardized, identifications of species verified by trained taxonomists, and new field and laboratory studies undertaken before we can expect to obtain an accurate description of the benthic fauna and its relations with the environment.

Circular↗
USGS1976

Guidelines for sample collecting and analytical methods used in the U.S. Geological Survey for determining chemical composition of coal

This report is intended to meet the many requests for information on current U.S. Geological Survey procedures in handling coal samples. In general, the exact type and number of samples of coal and associated rock to be collected are left to the best judgment of the geologist. Samples should be of unweathered coal or rock and representative of the bed or beds sampled; it is recommended that two channel samples, separated by 10 to 100 yards (10 to 100 metres) and weighing 4 to 5 pounds ( 1.8 to 2.3 kilograms) each, be collected of each 5 feet ( 1.5 metres) of vertical section. Care must be taken to avoid any sample contamination, and to record the exact locality, thickness, and stratigraphic information for each sample. Analytical methods are described for the determination of major, minor, and trace elements in coal. Hg, As, Sb, F, Se, U, and Th are determined in the raw coal, and the following 34 elements are determined after ashing the coal: Si, Al, Ca, Mg, Na, K, Fe (total), Cl, Ti, Mn, P, S (total), Cd, Li, Cu, Zn, Pb, B, Ba, Be, Co, Cr, Ga, La, Mo, Nb, Ni, Sc, Sr, Ti, V, Y, Yb, and Zr. The methods used to determine these elements include atomic absorption spectroscopy, X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy, optical emission spectroscopy, spectrophotometry, selective-ion electrode, and neutron activation analysis. A split of representative coal samples is submitted to the U.S. Bureau of Mines for proximate, ultimate, forms of sulfur, and Btu determinations.

Circular↗
USGS2002

Ground truth seismic events and location capability at Degelen mountain, Kazakhstan

We utilized nuclear explosions from the Degelen Mountain sub-region of the Semipalatinsk Test Site (STS), Kazakhstan, to assess seismic location capability directly. Excellent ground truth information for these events was either known or was estimated from maps of the Degelen Mountain adit complex. Origin times were refined for events for which absolute origin time information was unknown using catalog arrival times, our ground truth location estimates, and a time baseline provided by fixing known origin times during a joint hypocenter determination (JHD). Precise arrival time picks were determined using a waveform cross-correlation process applied to the available digital data. These data were used in a JHD analysis. We found that very accurate locations were possible when high precision, waveform cross-correlation arrival times were combined with JHD. Relocation with our full digital data set resulted in a mean mislocation of 2 km and a mean 95% confidence ellipse (CE) area of 6.6 km2 (90% CE: 5.1 km2), however, only 5 of the 18 computed error ellipses actually covered the associated ground truth location estimate. To test a more realistic nuclear test monitoring scenario, we applied our JHD analysis to a set of seven events (one fixed) using data only from seismic stations within 40?? epicentral distance. Relocation with these data resulted in a mean mislocation of 7.4 km, with four of the 95% error ellipses covering less than 570 km2 (90% CE: 438 km2), and the other two covering 1730 and 8869 km2 (90% CE: 1331 and 6822 km2). Location uncertainties calculated using JHD often underestimated the true error, but a circular region with a radius equal to the mislocation covered less than 1000 km2 for all events having more than three observations. ?? 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors↗
USGS2005

Water availability for the Western United States--Key scientific challenges

In the Western United States, the availability of water has become a serious concern for many communities and rural areas. Near population centers, surface-water supplies are fully appropriated, and many communities are dependent upon ground water drawn from storage, which is an unsustainable strategy. Water of acceptable quality is increasingly hard to find because local sources are allocated to prior uses, depleted by overpumping, or diminished by drought stress. Some of the inherent characteristics of the West add complexity to the task of securing water supplies. The Western States, including the arid Southwest, have the most rapid population growth in the United States. The climate varies widely in the West, but it is best known for its low precipitation, aridity, and drought. There is evidence that the climate is warming, which will have consequences for Western water supplies, such as increased minimum streamflow and earlier snowmelt events in snow-dominated basins. The potential for departures from average climatic conditions threatens to disrupt society and local to regional economies. The appropriative rights doctrine governs the management of water in most Western States, although some aspects of the riparian doctrine are being incorporated. The 'use it or lose it' provisions of Western water law discourage conservation and make the reallocation of water to instream environmental uses more difficult. The hydrologic sciences have defined the interconnectedness of ground water and surface water, yet these resources are still administered separately by most States. The definition of water availability has been expanded to include sustaining riparian ecosystems and individual endangered species, which are disproportionately represented in the Western States. Federal reserved rights, common in the West because of the large amount of Federal land, exist with quite senior priority dates whether or not water is currently being used. A major challenge for water users in the West is that these reserved rights may supersede other existing users. The minimum amount of water required, however, to sustain native peoples, a riparian system, or an endangered species eventually will need to be known in order to manage the available water supply. Periodic inventory and assessment of the amounts and trends of water available in surface water and ground water are needed to support water management. There is a widespread perception that the amount of available water is diminishing with time. This and other perceptions about water availability should be replaced by objective data and analysis. Some data are presented here for the major Western rivers that show that flows are not decreasing in most streams and rivers in the West. Systematic information is lacking to make broad assessments of ground-water availability, but available data for specific aquifers indicate that these aquifers are being depleted, especially near population centers. The complexity added to the issue of Western water availability by these and other factors gives rise to a significant role of science. Science has played a role in support of Western water development from the beginning, and the role has evolved and changed over time as society's values have changed. In this report, the role of science is discussed in three phases: (1) development and construction, (2) consequences and environmental awareness, and (3) sustainability. The development and construction phase includes some historical accounting of water development in the West and shows how some precedents set in those early days are still applied today.

western United States↗
USGS2015

U.S. Geological Survey activities related to American Indians and Alaska Natives: Fiscal years 2009 and 2010

The U.S. Geological Survey is the earth and natural science bureau within the U.S. Department of the Interior. The U.S. Geological Survey provides impartial information on the health of our ecosystems and environment, the natural hazards that threaten us, the natural resources we rely on, the negative effects of climate and land-use change, and the core science systems that help us provide timely, relevant, and usable information. The U.S. Geological Survey is not responsible for regulations or land management. In the late 1800s, John Wesley Powell the second director of the U.S. Geological Survey, followed his interest in the Tribes of the Great Basin and Colorado Plateau and studied their cultures, languages, and surroundings. From that early time, the U.S. Geological Survey has recognized the importance of Native knowledge as a complement to the U.S. Geological Survey mission to better understand the Earth and its systems. Collaboration allows the U.S. Geological Survey and Native American governments, organizations, and peoples to increase their mutual understanding of the increasing challenges facing our natural world. Although this report uses the term “resources,” the U.S. Geological Survey, through its interdisciplinary research, acknowledges the interconnectedness of the Earth and all the life forms that live upon it.

Circular↗
USGS2022

Rocky Mountain Region Science Exchange 2020—EarthMAP and the Colorado River Basin

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Rocky Mountain Region (RMR) hosted USGS scientists, managers, program coordinators, and leadership team members for a virtual Science Exchange during September 15–17, 2020. The Science Exchange had 216 registered participants and included 48 talks over the 3-day period. Invited speakers presented information about the novel USGS Earth Monitoring, Analysis, and Prediction (EarthMAP) concept. Scientists in the RMR and other regions showcased their research and participated in discussions related to the EarthMAP concept and EarthMAP applications. In addition, the Colorado River Basin Pilot Project, the first formal EarthMAP pilot project, was unveiled during the Science Exchange. Many of the products designed during the RMR Science Exchange were done so with the EarthMAP – Colorado River Basin Pilot Project in mind. This report summarizes the organization and objectives of the Science Exchange, highlights key points from session presentations, panel discussions, and breakout sessions, and, most importantly, discusses momentum generated for the EarthMAP – Colorado River Basin Pilot Project.

Colorado River Basin↗
USGS2005

Developing ecological criteria for prescribed fire in South Florida pine rockland ecosystems

The pine rocklands of South Florida, characterized by a rich herbaceous flora with many narrowly endemic taxa beneath an overstory of south Florida slash pine (Pinus elliottii var. densa), are found in three areas: the Miami Rock Ridge of southeastern peninsular Florida, the Lower Florida Keys, and slightly elevated portions of the southern Big Cypress National Preserve. Fire is an important element in these ecosystems, since in its absence the pine canopy is likely to be replaced by dense hardwoods, resulting in loss of the characteristic pineland herb flora. Prescribed fire has been used in Florida Keys pine forests since the creation of the National Key Deer Refuge (NKDR), with the primary aim of reducing fuels. Because fire can also be an effective tool in shaping ecological communities, we conducted a 4-year research study which explored a range of fire management options in NKDR. The intent of the study was to provide the Fish and Wildlife Service and other land managers with information regarding when and where to burn in order to perpetuate these unique forests. In 1998 we initiated a burning experiment in a randomized complete block design. Three treatments were to be carried out in a single well-defined block in each of two characteristic understory types during each year from 1998 through 2000. One understory type was characterized by a relatively sparse shrub layer and a well-developed herb layer ('open'), and the second had a dense shrub layer and poorly developed herb layer ('shrubby'). The three burn treatments were: (a) summer burn, (b) winter burn, and (c) no burn, or control. Three 1- ha plots were established in each block, and randomly assigned to the three treatments. Though the first year experimental burns were carried out without incident, constraints posed by external factors, including nationwide and statewide prohibitions on prescribed burning due to wildfires in other regions, delayed the experimental burns and precluded collection of postburn data on one third of the burns. Ultimately we burned only eleven plots, three in winter and eight in summer, over a four-year period from 1998 to 2001. Vegetation was sampled in a stratified, nested design within 18 plots. Trees were sampled in a 1.0-ha plot, shrubs in twenty 50-m2 circular (radius 4 m) subplots within the tree plot, and the herb layer in four circular 1-m2 quadrats (radius 0.57 m) within each subplot. The amount of fuel in the shrub layer was estimated by applying regression models to plant dimensional data, and ground layer fuel was estimated by a harvest method. The effects of Key deer herbivory on regeneration of the understory pine rockland plant community after fire was studied by monitoring inside and outside exclosures established within two of the six blocks. Pine trees constituted more than half (53.3%) of the biomass, but understory fine fuels comprised a surprisingly high proportion of total aboveground biomass. In the three blocks in which paired summer and winter burns were successfully conducted, the summer burns were more intense than the winter burns as judged by our indicators of fire intensity. Because of the differences in fire intensity between seasons, it was not possible to say whether observed differences in vegetation response between summer and winter burns were due to season or to fire intensity. The mortality of South Florida slash pine trees was greater after the summer burn than the winter burn in each block, but other vegetation responses were rarely as consistent. For instance, Metopium showed less recovery after summer burns in two blocks and after the winter burn in the third block. Moreover, there were instances in which alternative growth stages of the same species responded differently. Adult palms succumbed more frequently to summer than winter burns, and mortality of Coccothrinax exceeded that of Thrinax. In contrast, small palms recovered more readily after summer burns than winter burns. High in

Florida↗
USGS2024

Coastal Science Navigator companion guide—Discover the U.S. Geological Survey coastal science products you need

The Coastal Science Navigator is an online gateway to a wide variety of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) coastal change hazards-related information, data, and tools relevant to stakeholders’ scientific and decision-making needs. The products within the Coastal Science Navigator provide data related to past, present, and future threats to our coastlines. The filter search allows users to see all available products and identify relevant options by time scale, geographic scope, coastal hazard theme, and other filters. The guided search suggests products based on users’ answers to a short series of questions. A comprehensive summary is available for each product. The idea for the Coastal Science Navigator arose in 2020 in response to stakeholder feedback identifying the need for a central source for USGS coastal science information. It was published in July 2023 and initially included 55 products. Regular updates are planned to integrate other existing and new products. This guide introduces some of the many coastal change hazards-related products available through the USGS. In it, we showcase the products included in the Coastal Science Navigator’s initial publication in July 2023. While it is not representative of all the information, tools, and data available, we hope it serves as a compelling snapshot of what the USGS has to offer and encourages you to explore the Coastal Science Navigator to discover more of the products you need. To navigate this guide, the products have been organized by the time scale they are best suited for—past, present, or future—although many products cover multiple time scales. An additional section features software, one of the many product types available as filters within the Coastal Science Navigator. Other products include downloadable data, websites, and geonarratives (web pages that combine text, images, and interactive maps into narratives you can scroll through). Featured geographic scopes are also highlighted within this guide, detailing some of the many regions in which the USGS conducts research and illustrating another way to filter products within the Coastal Science Navigator.

Circular↗
USGS2009

The quality of our nation’s waters: Quality of water from domestic wells in principal aquifers of the United States, 1991–2004— Overview of major findings

More than 43 million people - about 15 percent of the U.S. population - rely on domestic wells as their source of drinking water (Hutson and others, 2004). The quality and safety of water from domestic wells, also known as private wells, are not regulated by the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act or, in most cases, by state laws. Rather, individual homeowners are responsible for maintaining their domestic well systems and for monitoring water quality. The lack of regular monitoring of domestic wells makes periodic assessments at national, regional, and local scales important sources for providing information about this key source of drinking water. This study from the National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) assesses water-quality conditions for about 2,100 domestic wells. The sampled wells are located in 48 states and in parts of 30 regionally extensive aquifers used for water supply in the United States. As many as 219 properties and contaminants, including pH, major ions, nutrients, trace elements, radon, pesticides, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs), were measured. Fecal indicator bacteria and additional radionuclides were analyzed for a smaller number of wells. The large number of contaminants assessed and the broad geographic coverage of the present study provides a foundation for an improved understanding of the quality of water from the major aquifers tapped by domestic supply wells in the United States.

Circular↗
USGS1998

Hydrology of Central Florida Lakes - A Primer

INTRODUCTION Lakes are among the most valued natural resources of central Florida. The landscape of central Florida is riddled with lakeswhen viewed from the air, it almost seems there is more water than land. Florida has more naturally formed lakes than other southeastern States, where many lakes are created by building dams across streams. The abundance of lakes on the Florida peninsula is a result of the geology and geologic history of the State. An estimated 7,800 lakes in Florida are greater than 1 acre in surface area. Of these, 35 percent are located in just four counties (fig. 1): Lake, Orange, Osceola, and Polk (Hughes, 1974b). Lakes add to the aesthetic and commercial value of the area and are used by many residents and visitors for fishing, boating, swimming, and other types of outdoor recreation. Lakes also are used for other purposes such as irrigation, flood control, water supply, and navigation. Residents and visitors commonly ask questions such as Whyare there so many lakes here?, Why is my lake drying up (or flooding)?, or Is my lake spring-fed? These questions indicate that the basic hydrology of lakes and the interaction of lakes with ground water and surface water are not well understood by the general population. Because of the importance of lakes to residents of central Florida and the many questions and misconceptions about lakes, this primer was prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the St. Johns River Water Management District and the South Florida Water Management District. The USGS has been collecting hydrologic data in central Florida since the 1920s, obtaining valuable information that has been used to better understand the hydrology of the water resources of central Florida, including lakes. In addition to data collection, as of 1994, the USGS had published 66 reports and maps on central Florida lakes (Garcia and Hoy, 1995). The main purpose of this primer is to describe the hydrology of lakes in central Florida, the interactions between lakes and ground- and surface-waters, and to describe how these interactions affect lake water levels. Included are descriptions of the basic geology and geomorphology of central Florida, origins of central Florida lakes, factors that affect lake water levels, lake water quality, and common methods of improving water quality. The geographic area discussed in this primer is approximate (fig. 1) and includes west and east-central Florida, extending from the Gulf of Mexico to the Atlantic Ocean coastlines, northward into Marion, Putnam, and Flagler Counties, and southward to Lake Okeechobee. The information presented here was obtained from the many publications available on lakes in central Florida, as well as from publications on Florida geology, hydrology, and primers on ground water, surface water, and water quality. Many publications are available that provide more detailed information on lake water quality, and this primer is not intended as an extensive treatise on that subject. The reader is referred to the reference section of this primer for sources of more detailed information on lake water quality. Lakes discussed in this report are identified in figure 2. Technical terms used in the report are shown in bold italics and are defined in the glossary. The classification of some water bodies as lakes is highly subjective. What one individual considers a lake another might consider a pond. Generally, any water- filled depression or group of depressions in the land surface could be considered a lake. Lakes differ from swamps or wetlands in the type and amount of vegetation, water depth, and some water-quality characteristics. Lakes typically have emergent vegetation along the shoreline with a large expanse of open water in the center. Swamps or wetlands, on the other hand, are characterized by a water surface interrupted by the emergence of many varieties of plant life, from saw grasses to cypress trees. Lakes may be na

Circular↗
USGS1987

The National Geographic Names Data Base: Phase II instructions

The Geographic Names Information System is a computer-based information system developed to meet major national needs by providing information for named entities in the United States, its territories, and outlying areas. The National Geographic Names Data Base, a component of the Geographic Names Information System, currently contains most names and associated information recorded on the 1:24,000-scale (or largest scale available) topographic maps of the U.S. Geological Survey. The work involved in this initial compilation of names shown on the topographic-map series, and the development and editing of the National Geographic Names Data Base, is referred to as Phase I. Optimal use and effectiveness of an automated names system require that the names of features not recorded on topographic maps be added. The systematic collection of names from other sources, including maps, charts, and texts, is termed Phase II. In addition, specific types of features not compiled during Phase I are encoded and added to the data base. Other names of importance to researchers and users, such as historical and variant names, are also included. The rules and procedures for Phase II research, compilation, and encoding are contained in this publication.

Circular↗
USGS2016

Get your science used—Six guidelines to improve your products

Introduction Natural scientists, like many other experts, face challenges when communicating to people outside their fields of expertise. This is especially true when they try to communicate to those whose background, knowledge, and experience are far distant from that field of expertise. At a recent workshop, experts in risk communication offered insights into the communication challenges of probabilistic hazard products, suggested tips, and shared their strategies for making products that a targeted audience can understand and use. Although the workshop was held to broaden the understanding and use of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Maps (NSHM), the workshop outcomes presented in this report can benefit anyone who develops products based on technical information. On the basis of research and practice into how people think, use tools, make decisions, and understand scientific/technical information, the social and behavioral scientists, marketers, and social-impact designers at the NSHM workshop provided remarkably consistent guidelines to develop successful science products, such as text, maps, and other products. In this report the guidelines are numbered for clarity, but they can be applied repeatedly, piecemeal, or out of order to fit each project and your resources.

Circular↗
USGS1974

Environmental impact analysis; the example of the proposed Trans-Alaska Pipeline

The environmental impact analysis made as required by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 for the proposed trans-Alaska pipeline included consideration of the (1) technologically complex and geographically extensive proposed project, (2) extremely different physical environments across Alaska along the proposed route and elsewhere in Alaska and in Canada along alternative routes, (3) socioeconomic environment of the State of Alaska, and (4) a wide variety of alternatives. The analysis was designed specifically to fit the project and environment that would be affected. The environment was divided into two general parts--natural physical systems and superposed socioeconomic systems--and those parts were further divided into discipline-oriented systems or components that were studied and analyzed by scientists of the appropriate discipline. Particular attention was given to potential feedback loops in the impact network and to linkages between the project's impacting effects and the environment. The results of the analysis as reported in the final environmental impact statement were that both unavoidable and threatened environmental impacts would result from construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed pipeline system and the developments related to it. The principal unavoidable effects would be (1) disturbances of terrain, fish and wildlife habitat, and human environs, (2) the results of the discharge of effluent from the tanker-ballast-treatment facility into Port Valdez and of some indeterminate amount of oil released into the ocean from tank-cleaning operations at sea, and (3) the results associated with increased human pressures of all kinds on the environment. Other unavoidable effects would be those related to increase of State and Native Corporation revenues, accelerated cultural change of the Native population, and extraction of the oil and gas resource. The main threatened environmental effects would all be related to unintentional oil loss from the pipeline, from tankers, or in the oil field. Oil losses from the pipeline could be caused by direct or indirect effects of earthquakes, destructive sea waves, slope failure caused by natural or artificial processes, thaw-plug instability (in permafrost), differential settlement of permafrost terrain, and bed scour and bank erosion at stream crossings. Oil loss from tankers could be caused by accidents during transfer operations at Valdez and at destination ports and by casualties involving tankers and other ships. Comparison of alternative routes and transportation systems and of their environmental impacts provided information which indicates to the author that one corridor containing both oil and gas pipelines would have less environmental impact than would separate corridors. Considering also the threat to the marine environment that any tanker system would impose and the threat that zones of high earthquake frequency and magnitude would impose on pipelines, it is apparent to the author that environmental impact and cost would be least for a single-corridor on-land route that avoided earthquake zones. The alternative trans-Alaska-Canada routes would meet these criteria. The decisions of the U.S. Department of the Interior, the U.S. Congress, and the President of the United States in favor of the proposed trans-Alaska pipeline system indicate the relative weight given by the decision makers in balancing the importance of potential environmental consequences against the advantages to be derived from rapid resource development.

Circular↗
USGS2013

U.S. Geological Survey natural hazards science strategy— Promoting the safety, security, and economic well-being of the Nation

Executive Summary The mission of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in natural hazards is to develop and apply hazard science to help protect the safety, security, and economic well-being of the Nation. The costs and consequences of natural hazards can be enormous, and each year more people and infrastructure are at risk. USGS scientific research—founded on detailed observations and improved understanding of the responsible physical processes—can help to understand and reduce natural hazard risks and to make and effectively communicate reliable statements about hazard characteristics, such as frequency, magnitude, extent, onset, consequences, and where possible, the time of future events. To accomplish its broad hazard mission, the USGS maintains an expert workforce of scientists and technicians in the earth sciences, hydrology, biology, geography, social and behavioral sciences, and other fields, and engages cooperatively with numerous agencies, research institutions, and organizations in the public and private sectors, across the Nation and around the world. The scientific expertise required to accomplish the USGS mission in natural hazards includes a wide range of disciplines that this report refers to, in aggregate, as hazard science. In October 2010, the Natural Hazards Science Strategy Planning Team (H–SSPT) was charged with developing a long-term (10-year) Science Strategy for the USGS mission in natural hazards. This report fulfills that charge, with a document hereinafter referred to as the Strategy, to provide scientific observations, analyses, and research that are critical for the Nation to become more resilient to natural hazards. Science provides the information that decisionmakers need to determine whether risk management activities are worthwhile. Moreover, as the agency with the perspective of geologic time, the USGS is uniquely positioned to extend the collective experience of society to prepare for events outside current memory. The USGS has critical statutory and nonstatutory roles regarding floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, landslides, coastal erosion, volcanic eruptions, wildfires, and magnetic storms—the hazards considered in this plan. There are numerous other hazards of societal importance that are considered either only peripherally or not at all in this Strategy because they are either in another of the USGS strategic science plans (such as drought) or not in the overall mission of the USGS (such as tornados).

Circular↗
USGS1961

Sonic depth sounder for laboratory and field use

The laboratory investigation of roughness in alluvial channels has led to the development of a special electronic device capable of mapping the streambed configuration under dynamic conditions. This electronic device employs an ultrasonic pulse-echo principle, similar to that of a fathometer, that utilizes microsecond techniques to give high accuracy in shallow depths. This instrument is known as the sonic depth sounder and was designed to cover a depth range of 0 to 4 feet with an accuracy of ? 0.5 percent. The sonic depth sounder is capable of operation at frequencies of 500, 1,000 and 2,000 kilocycles. The ultrasonic beam generated at the transducer is designed to give a minimum-diameter interrogating signal over the extended depth range. The information obtained from a sonic depth sounder is recorded on a strip-chart recorder. This permanent record allows an analysis to be made of the streambed configuration under different dynamic conditions. The model 1024 sonic depth sounder was designed principally as a research instrument to meet laboratory needs. As such, it is somewhat limited in its application as a field instrument on large streams and rivers. The principles employed in this instrument, however, have many potentials for field applications such as the indirect measurement of bed load when the bed roughness is ripples and (or) dunes, depth measurement, determination of bed configuration, and determination of depth of scour around bridge piers and abutments. For field application a modification of the present system into a battery-operated lightweight instrument designed to operate at a depth range of 0 to 30 feet is possible and desirable.

Circular↗