Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Progress Report”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 613 records · Page 34Linked to original sources

Water-resources activities, North Dakota District, fiscal year 1994-95

The mission of the U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division, is to provide the hydrologic information and understanding needed for the optimum utilization and management of the Nation's water resources for the overall benefit of the people of the United States. This report describes water-resources activities of the Water Resources Division in North Dakota in fiscal year 1994. Information on each project includes objectives, approach, progress, plans for fiscal year 1995, and completed and planned report products.

Open-File Report↗

United States Geological Survey Annual Report, Fiscal Year 1975

The Survey resumes the practice of annually summarizing the progress it has made in identifying the Nation's land, water, energy, and mineral resources, classifying federally owned mineral lands and waterpower sites, and in supervising the exploration and development of energy and mineral resources on Federal and Indian lands. The Annual Report for 1975 consists of five parts: * The Year in Review - a review of the issues and events which affected Survey programs and highlights of program accomplishments. * Perspectives - several short papers which address major resource issues and summarize recent advances in the earth sciences. * A description of the Survey's budget, programs, and accomplishments. * A set of statistical tables and related information which documents program trends, workloads, and accomplishments. * A compendium of Survey publications and information services available to the public. One purpose of this report is to increase public awareness and understanding of the Geological Survey's programs and, more generally, of the role of earth sciences information in helping to resolve many of the natural resource conflicts that face our society now and in the years ahead. To be useful, however, information must be available and readily accessible to those responsible for natural resource policy at the time that the decisions are made. This report emphasizes the types of information products and services provided by the Survey and tells how to obtain additional information.

Annual Report↗

Quality-assurance and data management plan for groundwater activities by the U.S. Geological Survey in Kansas, 2014

As the Nation’s principle earth-science information agency, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is depended on to collect data of the highest quality. This document is a quality-assurance plan for groundwater activities (GWQAP) of the Kansas Water Science Center. The purpose of this GWQAP is to establish a minimum set of guidelines and practices to be used by the Kansas Water Science Center to ensure quality in groundwater activities. Included within these practices are the assignment of responsibilities for implementing quality-assurance activities in the Kansas Water Science Center and establishment of review procedures needed to ensure the technical quality and reliability of the groundwater products. In addition, this GWQAP is intended to complement quality-assurance plans for surface-water and water-quality activities and similar plans for the Kansas Water Science Center and general project activities throughout the USGS. This document provides the framework for collecting, analyzing, and reporting groundwater data that are quality assured and quality controlled. This GWQAP presents policies directing the collection, processing, analysis, storage, review, and publication of groundwater data. In addition, policies related to organizational responsibilities, training, project planning, and safety are presented. These policies and practices pertain to all groundwater activities conducted by the Kansas Water Science Center, including data-collection programs, interpretive and research projects. This report also includes the data management plan that describes the progression of data management from data collection to archiving and publication.

Open-File Report↗

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

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

Great Lakes↗

Water-resources activities of the U.S. Geological Survey in North Dakota, fiscal year 1986

This report was prepared to inform interested Federal, State, and local agencies and private individuals of the activities of the Water Resources Division in the State. All ongoing water-resources projects in North Dakota in fiscal year 1986 are listed. Information on each project includes objectives, approach, progress in 1985, plans for 1986, completed and planned report products, and the name of the project chief.

Open-File Report↗

Reported investments in earthquake mitigation top $73 to $80 billion in the San Francisco Bay Area, California, since the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake

The purpose of this report is to provide a compilation of structural retrofits and replacements of older buildings and infrastructure in the San Francisco Bay Area that have either been completed since 1989 or that are in progress as of October 2018. For the purposes of this report, all or parts of nine Bay Area counties were included: Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma. Santa Cruz County was not included. The compilation of 700 investments is presented as a table in the appendix. We consider this table as version 1, as we urge that those familiar with additional projects contact the report authors with information to update the table. In total, we have identified \$73 to \$80 billion in investments to retrofit or replace structures to mitigate the impacts of future San Francisco Bay Area earthquakes. These totals represent an average investment of \$2.5 to \$2.8 billion per year in retrofits and replacement of structures since 1989.

California↗

Demonstration and validation of a regenerated cellulose dialysis membrane diffusion sampler for monitoring groundwater quality and remediation progress at DoD sites: Perchlorate and ordnance compounds

This final technical report documents the demonstration and validation of regenerated cellulose dialysis membrane diffusion samplers (RCDM samplers) for use in collecting groundwater samples for perchlorate and a suite of explosives compounds. This project, ER-0313, was funded by the Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP). The primary objectives of the project were; (1) to determine the usefulness of RCDM samplers in collecting perchlorate and a suite of explosives compounds from groundwater, (2) to determine the optimum equilibration times for these constituents to diffuse into the RCDM sampler, (3) to compare water-quality results and sampling costs from samples collected with RCDM samplers to samples collected with a low-flow purging technique, and (4) to transfer the technology while gaining regulatory acceptance. Equilibration times were determined in bench-scale testing for perchlorate and 14 nitroaromatic and nitramine explosives compounds. Field comparisons were conducted at two Department of Defense (DoD) sites: (1) Aberdeen Proving Grounds (APG), Maryland, and, (2) Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey. Samples collected with the two sampling techniques were compared graphically and statistically to determine the significance of any differences found. RCDM samplers were found to cost significantly less than samples collected with a low-flow purging procedure. Sampling time was reduced by 84%, compared to low-flow purging. The total sampling costs per sample were calculated to be 71% less with an RCDM sampler, compared to low-flow purging.

Maryland, New Jersey↗

Characterization of the rhyolite of Bodie Hills and 40Ar/39Ar intercalibration with Ar mineral standards

The rhyolite of Bodie Hills (California) is characterized compositionally and the geochronology of selected phases is studied. Sanidine (BHs) from the rhyolite is well suited as a 40 Ar/ 39 Ar reference material with high K/Ca and radiogenic yield. Intercalibration with GA1550 biotite from the Dromedary igneous complex (New South Wales, Australia) yields an age of 9.7946 ± 0.0031 Ma for BHs relative to an age of 98.79 ± 0.54 Ma for GA1550 and a calibration factor ( R BHs/GA1550 ) of 0.096719 ± 0.000032. BHs is also intercalibrated with sanidines of the Taylor Creek Rhyolite (TCs; R TCs/BHs of 2.90874 ± 0.00067), Fish Canyon Tuff (FCs; R FCs/BHs of 2.88339 ± 0.00088), and rhyolite of Alder Creek (ACs; R ACs/BHs of 0.12028 ± 0.00024). These calibration factors yield ages of 28.344 ± 0.011 Ma, 28.099 ± 0.013 Ma, and 1.1809 ± 0.0024 Ma for TCs, FCs, and ACs, respectively, relative to GA1550. Full propagation of errors increases these uncertainties and that of BHs to ±0.9% of their ages. Calibration of BHs using the astronomically tuned age of FCs determined by Kuiper et al. (2008) yields an age of 9.8295 ± 0.0036 Ma. Stepwise heating of BHs reveals the same small, progressive increase in age across the age spectrum reported for FCs, ACs, and other potassium feldspars (e.g., Foland and Xu, 1990; Phillips et al., 2017). This increase is consistent with mass fractionation of argon during step heating and favors use of single-step fusion ages of all sanidines for monitor and calibration purposes.

Chemical Geology↗

Activities of the Water Resources Division in Arizona, 1986-91

Water-resources activities of the U.S. Geological Survey in Arizona consist of collecting water- resources data and conducting interpretive hydrologic investigations and research. The water- resources data and the results of the interpretive investigations and research are published or released by the U.S. Geological Survey or by cooperating agencies. The report describes the data-collection activities and water-resources investigations in Arizona for fiscal years 1986-91 (October 1, 1985, to September 30, 1991). The report includes a brief description of the origin of the U.S. Geological Survey, the basic mission of the Water Resources Division, organization of the Arizona District, sources of funding, and a summary of water conditions in Arizona. Information is given for each project and includes the objective, approach, progress and results, and plans for the following year. The report also includes a list of publications prepared by the Arizona District, Water Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey, that were published from 1984 to 1991.

Open-File Report↗

Water-resources activities, North Dakota District, fiscal year 1990

The mission of the U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division, is to provide the hydrologic information and understanding needed for the optimum utilization and management of the Nation's water resources for the overall benefit of the people of the United States. This report describes waterresources activities of the Water Resources Division in North Dakota in fiscal year 1990. Information on each project includes objectives, approach, progress in fiscal year 1990, plans for fiscal year 1991, completed and planned report products, and the name of the project chief.

Open-File Report↗

Agricultural conservation practice implementation in the Chesapeake Bay watershed supported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) provides cost-share funding and technical assistance to support the implementation of agricultural conservation practices on farms throughout the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Conservation implementation has been substantial in the time period for which digital records are available (from 2007 through 2017). Farmer participation in USDA conservation programs is voluntary and the implementation data are privacy protected. In 2010, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and USDA formed a cooperative partnership to analyze the effects of agricultural conservation on sediment, nutrient, and pesticide transport to the Chesapeake Bay. The USDA provides conservation implementation records for Chesapeake Bay farms to the USGS, with strict limitations on the use of the data to maintain confidentiality of site-specific farm data. The USGS aggregates the data to maintain farmer privacy, and subsequently provides the aggregated datasets to the public to inform conservation decision making processes. As part of that process, the USGS collaborates with the USDA to increase the understanding and quality of the USDA datasets and informs the interpretation of data records by Chesapeake Bay Program partners. The USGS obtains USDA conservation datasets in October of each year, performs data handling and quality checks as described in this document, and delivers aggregated summaries to the six Chesapeake Bay state jurisdictions for use in reporting conservation implementation to the Chesapeake Bay Partnership’s Annual Progress Review, which occurs in December of each year. The privacy protected, site-specific datasets are also used by USGS scientists to understand the effects of agricultural conservation on sediment, nutrient, and pesticide transport to the Chesapeake Bay at the small watershed scale. This publication describes the methods used to aggregate the datasets herein made available to the public at county and eight-digit hydrologic unit code watershed scales, reporting annual implementation from 2007 through 2017. It also documents the effect of geographic aggregation scale on the reportability of records and provides details regarding appropriate use and interpretation of the data records.

Chesapeake Bay Watershed↗

7th U.S. / Japan Natural Resources (UJNR) Panel on Earthquake Research: Abstract volume and technical program

The U.S. / Japan Natural Resources (UJNR) Panel on Earthquake Research promotes advanced study toward a more fundamental understanding of the earthquake process and hazard estimation. The Panel promotes basic and applied research to improve our understanding of the causes and effects of earthquakes and to facilitate the transmission of research results to those who implement hazard reduction measures on both sides of the Pacific and around the world. Meetings are held every other year, and alternate between countries with short presentation on current research and local field trips being the highlights. The 5th Joint Panel meeting was held at Asilomar, California in October, 2004. The technical sessions featured reports on the September 28, 2004 Parkfield, California earthquake, progress on earthquake early warning and rapid post-event assessment technology, probabilistic earthquake forecasting and the newly discovered phenomenon of nonvolcanic tremor. The Panel visited the epicentral region of the M 6.0 Parkfield earthquake and viewed the surface ruptures along the San Andreas Fault. They also visited the San Andreas Fault Observatory at Depth (SAFOD), which had just completed the first phase of drilling into the fault. The 6th Joint Panel meeting was held in Tokushima, Japan in November, 2006. The meeting included very productive exchanges of information on approaches to systematic observation of earthquake processes. Sixty eight technical papers were presented during the meeting on a wide range of subjects, including interplate earthquakes in subduction zones, slow slip and nonvolcanic tremor, crustal deformation, recent earthquake activity and hazard mapping. Through our discussion, we reaffirmed the benefits of working together to achieve our common goal of reducing earthquake hazard, continued cooperation on issues involving densification of observation networks and the open exchange of data among scientific communities. We also reaffirmed the importance of making information public in a timely manner. The Panel visited sites along the east coast of Shikoku that were inundated by the tsunami caused by the 1946 Nankai earthquake where they heard from survivors of the disaster and saw new tsunami shelters and barriers. They also visited the Median Tectonic Line, a major onshore strike-slip fault on Shikoku. The 7th Joint Panel meeting was held in Seattle, Wash., U.S.A. from October 27-30, 2008.

Open-File Report↗

Some aspects of U.S. Geological Survey activities related to the effects of contaminants on water resources

The U.S. Geological Survey 's water resources programs are supported by direct annual appropriations from Congress, the Federal-State Cooperative Program (50:50 matching of funds), and by funds provided by other Federal agencies. For fiscal year 1987, total obligations exceeded $250 million for activities in every State, Puerto Rico, and several territories in cooperation with nearly 1,000 local, State, regional, and other Federal agencies. The quality of the ground and surface waters has been of concern to the Geological Survey from the time it was established. During the past few years, water resources contamination has received highest priority consideration and a variety of investigations and research are ongoing to obtain an improved understanding of the Nation 's water quality and the factors affecting it. This report presents information on program priorities and discusses the coordinated activities focusing on the effects of contaminants on water resources. The report also describes a number of investigations and research activities in progress during fiscal years of 1986 and 1987, and provides guidance on how to obtain additional details. (Author 's abstract)

Open-File Report↗

An epizootic among rainbow trout

An epizootic among rainbow trout ( Salmo gairdnerii ) in a private trout farm, resulting from a species of Ichthyosporidium that caused very high mortality rates in all ages of trout, reported from the State of Washington.

Progressive Fish-Culturist↗

Basin-scale simulation of current and potential climate changed hydrologic conditions in the Lake Michigan Basin, United States

The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) is the largest public investment in the Great Lakes in two decades. A task force of 11 Federal agencies developed an action plan to implement the initiative. The U.S. Department of the Interior was one of the 11 agencies that entered into an interagency agreement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as part of the GLRI to complete scientific projects throughout the Great Lakes basin. The U.S. Geological Survey, a bureau within the Department of the Interior, is involved in the GLRI to provide scientific support to management decisions as well as measure progress of the Great Lakes basin restoration efforts. This report presents basin-scale simulated current and forecast climatic and hydrologic conditions in the Lake Michigan Basin. The forecasts were obtained by constructing and calibrating a Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System (PRMS) model of the Lake Michigan Basin; the PRMS model was calibrated using the parameter estimation and uncertainty analysis (PEST) software suite. The calibrated model was used to evaluate potential responses to climate change by using four simulated carbon emission scenarios from eight general circulation models released by the World Climate Research Programme’s Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 3. Statistically downscaled datasets of these scenarios were used to project hydrologic response for the Lake Michigan Basin. In general, most of the observation sites in the Lake Michigan Basin indicated slight increases in annual streamflow in response to future climate change scenarios. Monthly streamflows indicated a general shift from the current (2014) winter-storage/snowmelt-pulse system to a system with a more equally distributed hydrograph throughout the year. Simulated soil moisture within the basin illustrates that conditions within the basin are also expected to change on a monthly timescale. One effect of increasing air temperature as a result of the changing climate was the appreciable increase in the length of the growing season in the Lake Michigan Basin. The increase in growing season will cause an increase in evapotranspiration across the Lake Michigan Basin, which will directly affect soil moisture and late growing season streamflows. Output from the Lake Michigan Basin PRMS model is available through an online dynamic web mapping service available at (http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2014/5175/). The map service includes layers for the each of the 8 global climate models and 4 carbon emission scenarios combinations for 12 hydrologic model state variables. The layers are pre-rendered maps of annual hydrologic response from 1977 through 2099 that provide an easily accessible online method to examine climate change effects across the Lake Michigan Basin.

Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin↗

Louisiana Trustee Implementation Group monitoring and adaptive management strategy (LA TIG MAM Strategy)

The purpose of the Louisiana Trustee Implementation Group (LA TIG) Monitoring and Adaptive Management (MAM) Strategy is to outline an approach for the LA TIG to prioritize MAM activities in Louisiana for effective and efficient evaluation of the restoration of resources injured by the Deepwater Horizon (DWH) oil spill. Working from the Restoration Goals and Restoration Approaches outlined in the Programmatic Damage Assessment and Restoration Plan (PDARP), the LA TIG developed High Level Objectives specific for Louisiana-designated Restoration Types. Fundamental Objectives were then developed for each High Level Objective to specify key natural resource processes specific to Louisiana. For each Fundamental Objective, a framework of Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, appropriate Timeline (SMART) Objectives was developed to assess progress towards attaining PDARP Restoration Goals.

Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas↗

Monitoring surface-water quality in Arizona: the fixed-station network

Arizona is an arid State in which economic development is influenced largely by the quantity and quality of water and the location of adequate water supplies. In 1995, surface water supplied about 58 percent of total withdrawals in Arizona. Of the total amount of surface water used in 1995, about 89 percent was for agriculture, 10 percent for public supply, and 1 percent for industrial supply (including mining and thermoelectric; Solley and others, 1998). As a result of rapid population growth in Arizona, historic agricultural lands in the Phoenix (Maricopa County) and Tucson (Pima County) areas are now being developed for residential and commercial use; thus, the amount of water used for public supply is increasing. The Clean Water Act was established by U.S. Congress (1972) in response to public concern about water-pollution control. The act defines a process by which the United States Congress and the citizens are informed of the Nation’s progress in restoring and maintaining the quality of our waters. The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) is the State-designated agency for this process and, as a result, has developed a monitoring program to assess water quality in Arizona. The ADEQ is required to submit a water-quality assessment report to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) every 2 years. The USEPA summarizes the reports from each State and submits a report to the Congress characterizing water quality in the United States. These reports serve to inform Congress and the public of the Nation’s progress toward the restoration and maintenance of water quality in the United States (Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, 1998).

Arizona↗