SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Applied Sciences”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 73 records · Page 4Linked to original sources

USGS2021

Long-term trends in regional wet mercury deposition and lacustrine mercury concentrations in four lakes in Voyageurs National Park

Although anthropogenic mercury (Hg) releases to the environment have been substantially lowered in the United States and Canada since 1990, concerns remain for contamination in fish from remote lakes and rivers where atmospheric deposition is the predominant source of mercury. How have aquatic ecosystems responded? We report on one of the longest known multimedia data sets for mercury in atmospheric deposition: aqueous total mercury (THg aq ), methylmercury (MeHg aq ), and sulfate from epilimnetic lake-water samples from four lakes in Voyageurs National Park (VNP) in northern Minnesota; and total mercury (THg) in aquatic biota from the same lakes from 2001–2018. Wet Hg deposition at two regional Mercury Deposition Network sites (Fernberg and Marcell, Minnesota) decreased by an average of 22 percent from 1998–2018; much of the decreases occurred prior to 2009, with relatively flat trends since 2009. In the four VNP lakes, epilimnetic MeHg aq concentrations declined by an average of 44 percent and THg aq by an average of 27 percent. For the three lakes with long-term biomonitoring, temporal patterns in biotic THg concentrations were similar to patterns in MeHg aq concentrations; however, biotic THg concentrations declined significantly in only one lake. Epilimnetic MeHg aq may be responding both to a decline in atmospheric Hg deposition as well as a decline in sulfate deposition, which is an important driver of mercury methylation in the environment. Results from this case study suggest that regional- to continental-scale decreases in both mercury and sulfate emissions have benefitted aquatic resources, even in the face of global increases in mercury emissions.

Minnesota↗

USGS2023

A novel suspended-sediment sampling method: Depth-Integrated Grab (DIG)

Measuring suspended sediment in fluvial systems is critical to understanding and managing water resources. Sampling suspended sediment has been the primary means of understanding fluvial suspended sediment. Specialized samplers, sampling methods, and laboratory methods developed by select U.S. Federal Agencies are more representative of river and stream conditions than commonly used grab sampling and total suspended solids (TSS) laboratory methods but are not widely used because they are expensive, time consuming, and not required as part of water quality standards in the United States. A new suspended-sediment sampling method called a depth-integrated grab (DIG) was developed by combining certain elements from both grab and depth-integrating sampling methods and suspended-sediment concentration (SSC) laboratory methods. The goal of the DIG method was to provide more accurate results than Grab-TSS while being easier and cheaper to sample than specialized samplers and methods. Approximately 50 paired comparison samples were collected at 9 sites in Minnesota from 2018 through 2019. Results showed no significant difference between the DIG and specialized sampling methods and a significant difference between both methods and the Grab-TSS method. The DIG-SSC provided an improved alternative to the Grab-TSS method, but additional research and testing is important to evaluate if this method is appropriate in different conditions than were observed in this study.

Minnesota↗

USGS2025

Discovery of an intact Quaternary paleosol, Georgia Bight, USA

A previously buried paleosol was found on the continental shelf during a study of sea floor scour, nucleated by large artificial reef structures such as vessel hulks, barges, train cars, military vehicles, etc., called “scour nuclei”. It is a relic paleo-land surface of sapling-sized tree stumps, root systems, and fossil animal bone exhumed by scour processes active adjacent to the artificial reef structure. Over the span of five research cruises to the site in 2022–2024, soil samples were taken using hand excavation, PONAR grab samplers, split spoon, hollow tube auger, and a modified Shelby-style push box. High-definition (HD) video was taken using a Remotely Operated Vehicle (ROV) and diver-held cameras. Radiocarbon dating of wood samples returned ages of 42,015–43,417 calibrated years before present (cal yrBP). Pollen studies, together with the recovered macrobotanical remains, support our interpretation of the site as a freshwater forested wetland whose keystone tree species was Taxodium distichum —bald cypress. The paleosol was identified as an Aquult, a sub-order of Ultisols where water tables are at or near the surface year-round. A deep (0.25 m+) argillic horizon comprised the bulk of the preserved soil. Comparable Ultisols found in Georgia wetlands include Typic Paleaquult (Grady and Bayboro series) soils.

Georgia↗

USGS2018

Advantages and limitations to the use of optical measurements to study sediment properties

Measurements of optical properties have been used for decades to study particle distributions in the ocean. They are useful for estimating suspended mass concentration as well as particle-related properties such as size, composition, packing (particle porosity or density), and settling velocity. Measurements of optical properties are, however, biased, as certain particles, because of their size, composition, shape, or packing, contribute to a specific property more than others. Here, we study this issue both theoretically and practically, and we examine different optical properties collected simultaneously in a bottom boundary layer to highlight the utility of such measurements. We show that the biases we are likely to encounter using different optical properties can aid our studies of suspended sediment. In particular, we investigate inferences of settling velocity from vertical profiles of optical measurements, finding that the effects of aggregation dynamics can seldom be ignored.

MDPI - Applied Sciences↗

USGS2019

A novel method to characterise levels of pharmaceutical pollution in large scale aquatic monitoring campaigns

Much of the current understanding of pharmaceutical pollution in the aquatic environment is based on research conducted in Europe, North America and other select high-income nations. One reason for this geographic disparity of data globally is the high cost and analytical intensity of the research, limiting accessibility to necessary equipment. To reduce the impact of such disparities, we present a novel method to support large-scale monitoring campaigns of pharmaceuticals at different geographical scales. The approach employs the use of a miniaturised sampling and shipping approach with a high throughput and fully validated direct-injection High-Performance Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry method for the quantification of 61 active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) and their metabolites in tap, surface, wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) influent and WWTP effluent water collected globally. A 7-day simulated shipping and sample stability assessment was undertaken demonstrating no significant degradation over the 1–3 days which is typical for global express shipping. Linearity (r 2 ) was consistently ≥0.93 (median = 0.99 ± 0.02), relative standard deviation of intra- and inter-day repeatability and precision was <20% for 75% and 68% of the determinations made at three concentrations, respectively, and recovery from Liquid Chromatography Mass Spectrometry grade water, tap water, surface water and WWTP effluent were within an acceptable range of 60–130% for 87%, 76%, 77% and 63% of determination made at three concentrations respectively. Limits of detection and quantification were determined in all validated matrices and were consistently in the ng/L level needed for environmentally relevant API research. Independent validation of method results was obtained via an interlaboratory comparison of three surface-water samples and one WWTP effluent sample collected in North Liberty, Iowa (USA). Samples used for the interlaboratory validation were analysed at the University of York Centre of Excellence in Mass Spectrometry (York, UK) and the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory in Denver (Colorado, USA). These results document the robustness of using this method on a global scale. Such application of this method would essentially eliminate the interlaboratory analytical variability typical of such large-scale datasets where multiple methods were used.

Applied Sciences↗

USGS2019

Airborne waveform lidar simulator using the radiative transfer of a laser pulse

An airborne lidar simulator creates a lidar point cloud from a simulated lidar system, flight parameters, and the terrain digital elevation model (DEM). At the basic level, the lidar simulator computes the range from a lidar system to the surface of a terrain using the geomatics lidar equation. The simple computation effectively assumes that the beam divergence is zero. If the beam spot is meaningfully large due to the large beam divergence combined with high sensor altitude, then the beam plane with a finite size interacts with a ground target in a realistic and complex manner. The irradiance distribution of a delta-pulse beam plane is defined based on laser pulse radiative transfer. The airborne lidar simulator in this research simulates the interaction between the delta-pulse and a three-dimensional (3D) object and results in a waveform. The waveform will be convoluted using a system response function. The lidar simulator also computes the total propagated uncertainty (TPU). All sources of the uncertainties associated with the position of the lidar point and the detailed geomatics equations to compute TPU are described. The boresighting error analysis and the 3D accuracy assessment are provided as examples of the application using the simulator

Applied Sciences↗

USGS1978

Statistical inference from capture data on closed animal populations

The estimation of animal abundance is an important problem in both the theoretical and applied biological sciences. Serious work to develop estimation methods began during the 1950s, with a few attempts before that time. The literature on estimation methods has increased tremendously during the past 25 years (Cormack 1968, Seber 1973). However, in large part, the problem remains unsolved. Past efforts toward comprehensive and systematic estimation of density (D) or population size (N) have been inadequate, in general. While more than 200 papers have been published on the subject, one is generally left without a unified approach to the estimation of abundance of an animal population This situation is unfortunate because a number of pressing research problems require such information. In addition, a wide array of environmental assessment studies and biological inventory programs require the estimation of animal abundance. These needs have been further emphasized by the requirement for the preparation of Environmental Impact Statements imposed by the National Environmental Protection Act in 1970. This publication treats inference procedures for certain types of capture data on closed animal populations. This includes multiple capture-recapture studies (variously called capture-mark-recapture, mark-recapture, or tag-recapture studies) involving livetrapping techniques and removal studies involving kill traps or at least temporary removal of captured individuals during the study. Animals do not necessarily need to be physically trapped; visual sightings of marked animals and electrofishing studies also produce data suitable for the methods described in this monograph. To provide a frame of reference for what follows, we give an exampled of a capture-recapture experiment to estimate population size of small animals using live traps. The general field experiment is similar for all capture-recapture studies (a removal study is, of course, slightly different). A typical field experiment is the following: a number of traps are positioned in the area to be studied, say 144 traps in a 12 X 12 grid, 7 m apart. At the beginning of the study (j=1) a sample size of n 1 is taken from the population, the animals are tagged and marked for future identification, and then returned to the population, usually at the same point where they were trapped. After allowing time of the marked and unmarked animals to mix, a second sample (j=2, often the following day) or n 2 animals is then taken.the second sample normally contains both marked and unmarked animals. The unmarked animals are marked and all captured animals are released back into the population. This procedure continues for t periods where t ≥ 2. The animals should be marked in such a way that the capture-recapture history of each animal caught during the study is known. In practice, toes are often clipped to uniquely identify individual animals (Taber and Cowan 1969) or serially numbered tags are sometimes used on larger animals. Such capture studies are classified by 2 schemes that are directly related to what class of models are appropriate and what parameters can be estimated. The first classification addresses the subject of closure. Closure usually means the size of the population is constant over the priod of investigation, i.e., no recruitment (birth or immigration) or losses (death or emigration). This is a strong assumption and, of course, never completely true in a natural biological population. For greater generality, we define closure to mean there are no unknown changes to the initial population. In practice, this means known losses (trap death), or deliberate removals) do not violate our definition of closure. If the study is properly designed, closure can be met at least approximately. Open or nonclosed populations explicitly allow for one or more types of recruitment or losses to operate during the course of the experiment (Jolly 1965, Seber 1965, Robson 1969, Pollock 1975). Only closed populations will be considered in this monograph. The second classification depends on the type of data collected with 2 possibilities occurring (Pollock 1974, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York): (1) only information on the recovery of marked animals is available for each sampling occasion, j, j=1, 2, ... t. (2) information on both marked and unmarked animals is available for each sampling occasion, j, j=1, 2, ... t. In case (1), population size (N) is not identifiable, however, other parameters can be estimated (Brownie et al. 1978). In case (2), N can be estimated using a wide variety of approaches depending upon what we wish to assume. Only case (2) will be dealt with here.

Wildlife Monographs↗

USGS2023

National preparedness strategy & action plan for potentially hazardous near-Earth objects and planetary defense

Near-Earth Objects (NEOs) are asteroids and comets that orbit the Sun, but have orbits that can bring them into Earth’s neighborhood—within 30 million miles of Earth’s orbit. Planetary defense is “applied planetary science” to address the NEO impact risks on Earth. This National Preparedness Strategy and Action Plan for Near-Earth Objects and Planetary Defense (2023 Planetary Defense Strategy) updates the United States’ first comprehensive Near-Earth Object Preparedness Strategy and Action Plan, released in 2018. The 2023 Planetary Defense Strategy builds on existing efforts by Federal Departments and Agencies to address the hazard of near-Earth object impacts, includes evaluation of where progress has been made since 2018, and focuses future work on planetary defense across the U.S. government. The 2023 Planetary Defense Strategy maintains and updates the core five goals of the 2018 Strategy and Action Plan, while adding a sixth goal to improve governance and interagency coordination on planetary defense issues across Federal Departments and Agencies for the decade ahead. The 2023 Planetary Defense Strategy focuses on six goals: • Goal 1: Enhance NEO detection, tracking, and characterization capabilities. • Goal 2: Improve NEO modeling, prediction, and information integration. • Goal 3: Develop technologies for NEO deflection and disruption missions. • Goal 4: Increase international cooperation on NEO preparation. • Goal 5: Strengthen and routinely exercise NEO impact emergency procedures and action protocols. • Goal 6: Improve U.S. governance of planetary defense through new interagency collaboration.

Report↗

USGS2023

Colorado River Basin Actionable and Strategic Integrated Science and Technology (ASIST) pilot project progress toward an information management and technology plan

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey carries out a wide variety of multidisciplinary science projects through the Bureau’s regions, mission areas, programs, and science centers. However, this structure can limit interactions among individual scientists, segregate data holdings, and make it difficult to apply holistic, interdisciplinary science. In addition, technological advances in sensors, data storage and analysis, computing power, and networking have resulted in an exponential growth in the volume, variety, and complexity of data. To address some of these challenges, the U.S. Geological Survey initiated the Colorado River Basin Actionable and Strategic Integrated Science and Technology (ASIST) pilot project to facilitate interdisciplinary science in the drought-stricken basin and apply information management and technology (IMT) resources that can be used to deliver actionable science efficiently and effectively. In fiscal year 2021, the Data Management and Advanced Technology subgroup of the ASIST pilot project worked toward developing an IMT plan that includes several advanced IMT solutions that are being implemented Bureau-wide by the Office of the Associate Chief Information Officer. This plan identifies applications, opportunities, and steps to leverage new and existing technologies, data, models, and knowledge to support integrated science projects across the Colorado River Basin. The subgroup also created an inventory of available IMT resources and their locations. The Colorado River Basin ASIST pilot project also developed a multiyear approach to build capacity for supporting integrated science projects in the Colorado River Basin, which provides an advanced IMT framework for expediting the production of interdisciplinary science related to the basin.

Colorado River basin↗

USGS2011

Applying remote sensing to invasive species science—A tamarisk example

The Invasive Species Science Branch of the Fort Collins Science Center provides research and technical assistance relating to management concerns for invasive species, including understanding how these species are introduced, identifying areas vulnerable to invasion, forecasting invasions, and developing control methods. This fact sheet considers the invasive plant species tamarisk (Tamarix spp), addressing three fundamental questions: *Where is it now? *What are the potential or realized ecological impacts of invasion? *Where can it survive and thrive if introduced? It provides peer-review examples of how the U.S. Geological Survey, working with other federal agencies and university partners, are applying remote-sensing technologies to address these key questions.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2023

The benefits of big-team science for conservation: Lessons learned from trinational monarch butterfly collaborations

Many pressing conservation issues are complex problems caused by multiple social and environmental drivers; their resolution is aided by interdisciplinary teams of scientists, decision makers, and stakeholders working together. In these situations, how do we generate science to effectively guide conservation (resource management and policy) decisions? This paper describes elements of successful big-team science in conservation, as well as shortcomings and lessons learned, based on our work with the monarch butterfly ( Danaus plexippus ) in North America. We summarize literature on effective science teams, extracting information about elements of success, effective implementation approaches, and barriers or pitfalls. We then describe recent and ongoing conservation science for the monarch butterfly in North America. We focus primarily on the activities of the Monarch Conservation Science Partnership–an international collaboration of interdisciplinary scientists, policy experts and natural resource managers spanning government, non-governmental and academic institutions—which developed science to inform imperilment status, recovery options, and monitoring strategies. We couch these science efforts in the adaptative management framework of Strategic Habitat Conservation, the business model for conservation employed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service to inform decision-making needs identified by stakeholders from Canada, the United States, and Mexico. We conclude with elements critical to effective big-team conservation science, discuss why science teams focused on applied conservation problems are unique relative to science teams focusing on traditional or theoretical research, and list benefits of big team science in conservation.

Frontiers in Environmental Science↗

USGS2022

Considering science needs to deliver actionable science

Conservation practitioners, natural resource managers, and environmental stewards often seek out scientific contributions to inform decision-making. This body of science only becomes actionable when motivated by decision makers considering alternative courses of action. Many in the science community equate addressing stakeholder science needs with delivering actionable science. However, not all efforts to address science needs deliver actionable science, suggesting that the synonymous use of these two constructs (delivering actionable science and addressing science needs) is not trivial. This can be the case when such needs are conveyed by people who neglect decision makers responsible for articulating a priority management concern and for specifying how the anticipated scientific information will aid the decision-making process. We argue that the actors responsible for articulating these science needs and the process used to identify them are decisive factors in the ability to deliver actionable science, stressing the importance of examining the provenance and the determination of science needs. Guided by a desire to enhance communication and cross-literacy between scientists and decision makers, we identified categories of actors who may inappropriately declare science needs (e.g., applied scientists with and without regulatory affiliation, external influencers, reluctant decision makers, agents in place of decision makers, and boundary organization representatives). We also emphasize the importance of, and general approach to, undertaking needs assessments or gap analyses as a means to identify priority science needs. We conclude that basic stipulations to legitimize actionable science, such as the declaration of decisions of interest that motivate science needs and using a robust process to identify priority information gaps, are not always satisfied and require verification. To alleviate these shortcomings, we formulated practical suggestions for consideration by applied scientists, decision makers, research funding entities, and boundary organizations to help foster conditions that lead to science output being truly actionable.

Conservation Biology↗

USGS2014

Landscape and climate science and scenarios for Florida

The Peninsular Florida Landscape Conservation Cooperative (PFLCC) is part of a network of 22 Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs) that extend from Alaska to the Caribbean. LCCs are regional-applied conservation-science partnerships among Federal agencies, regional organizations, States, tribes, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), private stakeholders, universities, and other entities within a geographic area. The goal of these conservation-science partnerships is to help inform managers and decision makers at a landscape scale to further the principles of adaptive management and strategic habitat conservation. A major focus for LCCs is to help conservation managers and decision makers respond to large-scale ecosystem and habitat stressors, such as climate change, habitat fragmentation, invasive species, and water scarcity. The purpose of the PFLCC is to facilitate planning, design, and implementation of conservation strategies for fish and wildlife species at the landscape level using the adaptive management framework of strategic habitat conservation—integrating planning, design, delivery, and evaluation. Florida faces a set of unique challenges when responding to regional and global stressors because of its unique ecosystems and assemblages of species, its geographic location at the crossroads of temperate and tropical climates, and its exposure to both rapid urbanization and rising sea levels as the climate warms. In response to these challenges, several landscape-scale science projects were initiated with the goal of informing decision makers about how potential changes in climate and the built environment could impact habitats and ecosystems of concern in Florida and the Southeast United States. In June 2012, the PFLCC, North Carolina State University, convened a workshop at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Coastal and Marine Science Center in St. Petersburg to assess the results of these integrated assessments and to foster an open dialogue about science gaps and future research needs.

Florida↗

USGS2011

Fort Collins Science Center fiscal year 2010 science accomplishments

The scientists and technical professionals at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Fort Collins Science Center (FORT), apply their diverse ecological, socioeconomic, and technological expertise to investigate complicated ecological problems confronting managers of the Nation's biological resources. FORT works closely with U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) agency scientists, the academic community, other USGS science centers, and many other partners to provide critical information needed to help answer complex natural-resource management questions. In Fiscal Year 2010 (FY10), FORT's scientific and technical professionals conducted ongoing, expanded, and new research vital to the science needs and management goals of DOI, other Federal and State agencies, and nongovernmental organizations in the areas of aquatic systems and fisheries, climate change, data and information integration and management, invasive species, science support, security and technology, status and trends of biological resources (including the socioeconomic aspects), terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems, and wildlife resources, including threatened and endangered species. This report presents selected FORT science accomplishments for FY10 by the specific USGS mission area or science program with which each task is most closely associated, though there is considerable overlap. The report also includes all FORT publications and other products published in FY10, as well as staff accomplishments, appointments, committee assignments, and invited presentations.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2021

Leveraging risk communication science across US federal agencies

Many US federal agencies apply principles from risk communication science across a wide variety of hazards. In so doing, they identify key research and practice gaps that, if addressed, could help better serve the nation’s communities and greatly enhance practice, research, and policy development.

Nature Human Behavior↗

USGS2016

Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program—2015 Year In Review

Summary The Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit (CRU) Program had its 80th anniversary in 2015. We did not have a party, but those of us who work directly for the Unit program on a daily basis celebrate the privilege we feel in being part of one of the greatest conservation institutions in history. Our mission is our hallmark: meeting the actionable science needs of our cooperators, providing them technical guidance and assistance in interpreting and applying new advances in science, and developing the future workforce through graduate education and mentoring. Our success in accomplishing our mission is due principally to the caliber of the scientists and students they recruit, and the tremendous support from our cooperators. The National Cooperators Coalition has been active in fostering support and I am very excited about their energy. A Special Session at the 2015 North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference was dedicated to the Unit program, and a vision for our future was presented at this most prestigious conservation policy forum. We compiled a directory of expertise within the Unit program organized within thematic science areas as identified by our cooperators. We intend for this directory to facilitate our transboundary initiatives where two or more Units in collaboration will be the catalyst that binds agencies and organizations together on landscape scale conservation science. We are co-sponsoring a workshop at the 2016 North American conference, along with the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, the American Fisheries Society, and The Wildlife Society to jump-start a dialogue on and identify issues associated with the widening gap between science and management. The CRU is viewed by our cooperators as being the standard for delivering actionable science in conservation, and the exception to the emerging trend. This is testament to the legacy of the Unit Program and the foundation it is built upon. In this Year in Review report, you will find details on staffing, vacancies, research funding, and other pertinent information. You will also see snapshots of Unit projects with information on how results have been or are being applied by cooperators. That is the essence of what we do: science that matter.

Circular↗

USGS2017

Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program—2016 year in review

Summary The Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units (CRU) Program had a productive year in 2016. Despite vacancies in our scientist ranks exceeding 20 percent, our research, training, and teaching portfolio was full and we graduated 93 students and published 398 manuscripts primarily focused on addressing the real conservation challenges of our cooperators. As I’ve stated before, our mission is our legacy: meeting the actionable science needs of our cooperators, providing them technical guidance and assistance in interpreting and applying new advances in science, and developing the future workforce through graduate education and mentoring. Our scientists and the manner in which they approach our mission continue to inspire me. The most rewarding part of my job is meeting and engaging with the students they recruit—the conservation professionals of the future. I cannot help but feel uplifted after discussions with and presentations by these young men and women. Personally, I owe my place in the profession today to the mentoring I received as a CRU student, and today’s CRU scientists have raised the bar. It gives me hope for the future of conservation, and added motivation to see our vacancies filled so that we can expand our portfolio. The National Cooperators’ Coalition has been active and is strategically working to build support on our behalf. Sincere thanks to the American Fisheries Society, the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, the Boone and Crockett Club, the National Association of University Fish and Wildlife Programs, the Wildlife Management Institute, and The Wildlife Society for their efforts and those of their affiliated members. We co-sponsored a workshop at the 2016 North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference along with the American Fisheries Society, the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, the Wildlife Management Institute, and The Wildlife Society, titled “Barriers and Bridges in Reconnecting Natural Resources Science and Management.” The workshop was well received and we have been asked to continue the dialogue with a second workshop in 2017. It was evident during the workshop that the CRU is viewed by our cooperators as an important and essential linkage between academia and practitioners. This is testament to the legacy of the CRU Program and the foundation it is built upon. In this Year in Review report, you will find details on staffing, vacancies, research funding, and other pertinent information. You will also see snapshots of CRU projects with information on how results have been or are being applied by cooperators. That is the essence of what we do: science that matters.

Circular↗

USGS2010

Assessment and management of ecological integrity: Chapter 12

Assessing and understanding the impacts of human activities on aquatic ecosystems has long been a focus of ecologists, water resources managers, and fisheries scientists. While traditional fisheries management focused on single-species approaches to enhance fish stocks, there is a growing emphasis on management approaches at community and ecosystem levels. Of course, as fisheries managers shift their attention from narrow (e.g., populations) to broad organizational scales (e.g., communities or ecosystems), ecological processes and management objectives become more complex. At the community level, fisheries managers may strive for a fish assemblage that is complex, persistent, and resilient to disturbance. Aquatic ecosystem level objectives may focus on management for habitat quality and ecological processes, such as nutrient dynamics, productivity, or trophic interactions, but a long-term goal of ecosystem management may be to maintain ecological integrity. However, human users and social, economic, and political demands of fisheries management often result in a reduction of ecological integrity in managed systems, and this conflict presents a principal challenge for the modern fisheries manager. The concepts of biotic integrity and ecological integrity are being applied in fisheries science, natural resource management, and environmental legislation, but explicit definitions of these terms are elusive. Biotic integrity of an ecosystem may be defined as the capability of supporting and maintaining an integrated, adaptive community of organisms having a species composition, diversity, and functional organization comparable to that of a natural habitat of the region (Karr and Dudley 1981). Following that, ecological integrity is the summation of chemical, physical, and biological integrity. Thus, the concept of ecological integrity extends beyond fish and represents a holistic approach for ecosystem management that is especially applicable to aquatic systems. The more general term, ecological condition, refers to the state of the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the environment and the processes and interactions that connect them. While the concept of ecological integrity may appear unambiguous, its assessment and practice are much less clear. Ecological integrity made its debut in the USA with the Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1972 (Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended through Public Law 107–303, November 27, 2002), which states only one objective, “to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters.” This legislation compelled resource managers to focus on chemical pollution from point effluent sources, such as industrial and municipal outflows, as well as give attention to diffuse, chronic, and watershed effects on ecological integrity. Further, the CWA allowed pursuit of restoration programs in degraded water bodies and catalyzed the science and practice of restoration ecology. The term ecosystem health is often raised in discussions of ecological integrity. Perhaps it is natural to anthropomorphize our concern for personal health to ecosystems, so it becomes a useful metaphor for understanding the concept of ecological integrity. However, whether or not an ecosystem should be considered an entity, such as a superorganism, is a debate without end that began with early ecologists and continues today (Clements 1916; Suter 1993; Simon 1999a). Regardless, the ecosystem is indeed a natural unit with a level of organization and properties beyond the collection of those species that occupy it and presents the most appropriate spatial and organizational scale in which to assess and study ecological integrity. Streams and rivers serve as integrators of chemical, physical, and biological conditions across the landscape, and while the theory and practice associated with ecological integrity of aquatic systems is easily applied to flowing waters and is emphasized in this chapter, they are broadly applicable among all aquatic systems.

Book chapter↗