Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Environmental Geology and Water Sciences”

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 73 records · Page 4Linked to original sources
USGS2009

Ecological assessment of wadeable streams on O`ahu, Hawai'i, 2006-2007: A pilot study

In 2006–07, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Pacific Islands Water Science Center (PIWSC), in cooperation with the Hawai‘i Department of Health (HDOH), conducted a pilot study as a participant in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA) Wadeable Streams Assessment (WSA) program. Forty randomly selected sites on perennial streams on O‘ahu, Hawai‘i, were surveyed for habitat characteristics, water chemistry, and benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages. Of the original sampling frame of approximately 505.2 miles of perennial stream, roughly 96.7±30.7 miles were found to be nonperennial or estuarine and another 200.5±64.7 miles were judged to be inaccessible. The scope of this report presents an assessment of the remaining 208±57.6 miles of accessible, wadeable, perennial stream length on O‘ahu. Benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages were used to determine the ecological condition at each site. Components of the benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages were assessed using the multimetric Preliminary–Hawaiian Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity (P–HBIBI) developed by Wolff (2005). Based on the P–HBIBI scores, an estimated 5.8±5.8 percent of the island’s total stream length is in most disturbed condition, 56±13.5 percent is in intermediately disturbed condition, and 38.2±13.2 percent is in least disturbed condition. Windward O‘ahu had the highest percentage of stream length in least disturbed biological condition at 56.7±20.8 percent. Using the relative abundance of insects, one of the core metrics that make up the P–HBIBI, 43.4±14.2 percent of the islandwide stream length was classified in the most disturbed condition—52±31.2 percent of the Honolulu region stream length and 51.4±23.3 percent of the windward O‘ahu stream length. An analysis of total nitrogen (N) estimated approximately 41.1±13.7 percent of the stream length on O‘ahu was in most disturbed condition. Regionally, the Honolulu region had the largest proportion, 61.3±28.6 percent, of most disturbed stream length in terms of total N. An analysis of total phosphorus (P) classified approximately 43.2±14 percent of the stream length on O‘ahu as most disturbed. Regionally, windward O‘ahu had the largest proportion, 78.4±19.5 percent, of stream length classified as most disturbed. An analysis of embeddedness classified 30.3±14.7 percent of O‘ahu’s stream length as most. Regionally, windward O‘ahu had the largest proportion, 43.3±17.1 percent, of stream length classified as most disturbed as compared to the reference condition. An analysis of riparian disturbance, an index of the in-channel, riparian, and near-stream human activities, classified 43±13 percent of stream length on O‘ahu as most disturbed. The Honolulu region had the largest proportion of stream length, 86.3±13.7 percent, classified as most disturbed. The information in this report is the first attempt in Hawai‘i to assess the islandwide ecological condition of wadeable, perennial streams on O‘ahu using the USEPA WSA probabilistic design. This study has demonstrated that such an assessment is practical and that it can provide information that may help the USEPA and HDOH in determining the status of aquatic ecosystems on O‘ahu, Hawai‘i. This study provides a baseline assessment of the current islandwide ecological condition and identifies potential environmental stressors. It can be used, with future WSA studies in Hawai‘i, to measure the changes in those conditions and the effectiveness of management efforts to protect, restore, and maintain Hawai‘i’s aquatic environment.

Hawaii↗
USGS2013

Hydrologic monitoring and selected hydrologic and environmental studies by the U.S. Geological Survey in Georgia, 2011–2013

This compendium of papers describes results of hydrologic monitoring and hydrologic and environmental studies completed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in Georgia during 2011–2013. The USGS addresses a wide variety of water issues in the State of Georgia working with local, State, and Federal partners. As the primary Federal science agency for water resource information, the USGS monitors the quantity and quality of water in the Nation’s rivers and aquifers, assesses the sources and fate of contaminants in aquatic systems, collects and analyzes data on aquatic ecosystems, develops tools to improve the application of hydrologic information, and ensures that its information and tools are available to all potential users. During 2011–2013, the USGS continued a long-term program of monitoring stream and groundwater resources, including flow, water quality, and water use. In addition, a variety of hydrologic and environmental studies were completed to assess water availability, hydrologic hazards, and the impact of development on water resources. Information on USGS activities in Georgia is available online at http://ga.water.usgs.gov/ .

Georgia↗
USGS2008

Methods of Data Collection, Sample Processing, and Data Analysis for Edge-of-Field, Streamgaging, Subsurface-Tile, and Meteorological Stations at Discovery Farms and Pioneer Farm in Wisconsin, 2001-7

The University of Wisconsin (UW)-Madison Discovery Farms (Discovery Farms) and UW-Platteville Pioneer Farm (Pioneer Farm) programs were created in 2000 to help Wisconsin farmers meet environmental and economic challenges. As a partner with each program, and in cooperation with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and the Sand County Foundation, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Wisconsin Water Science Center (WWSC) installed, maintained, and operated equipment to collect water-quantity and water-quality data from 25 edge-offield, 6 streamgaging, and 5 subsurface-tile stations at 7 Discovery Farms and Pioneer Farm. The farms are located in the southern half of Wisconsin and represent a variety of landscape settings and crop- and animal-production enterprises common to Wisconsin agriculture. Meteorological stations were established at most farms to measure precipitation, wind speed and direction, air and soil temperature (in profile), relative humidity, solar radiation, and soil moisture (in profile). Data collection began in September 2001 and is continuing through the present (2008). This report describes methods used by USGS WWSC personnel to collect, process, and analyze water-quantity, water-quality, and meteorological data for edge-of-field, streamgaging, subsurface-tile, and meteorological stations at Discovery Farms and Pioneer Farm from September 2001 through October 2007. Information presented includes equipment used; event-monitoring and samplecollection procedures; station maintenance; sample handling and processing procedures; water-quantity, waterquality, and precipitation data analyses; and procedures for determining estimated constituent concentrations for unsampled runoff events.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2009

Results of the Analyses for 1,4-Dioxane of Groundwater Samples Collected in the Tucson Airport Remediation Project Area, South-Central Arizona, 2006-2009

Extensive groundwater contamination resulting from industrial activities led to the listing of the Tucson International Airport Area (TIAA) as a Superfund Site by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) in 1983. Early investigations revealed elevated levels of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), including the chlorinated solvents trichloroethylene and perchloroethylene, in wells in the area. Several responsible parties were identified, and cleanup activities were initiated in the late 1980s using technology designed for removal of VOCs. In 2002, the compound 1,4-dioxane was discovered in wells in the TIAA area. Since then, 1,4-dioxane has been detected throughout the TIAA area at levels exceeding the USEPA Drinking Water Health Advisory value of 3 micrograms per liter (ug/L; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006). Chemical properties of 1,4-dioxane make it relatively unaffected by the treatment technologies employed in the TIAA area. In 2006, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Arizona Water Science Center, in cooperation with the U.S. Air Force Center for Engineering and the Environment, began an investigation into the extent of groundwater contamination by 1,4-dioxane in the area. Five rounds of groundwater sampling in the TIAA area have been completed by the USGS since that time, yielding a total of 210 samples. Results from these analyses indicate less than reportable concentrations of 1,4-dioxane in 30 percent of the samples, with 46 percent of the samples having concentrations at or above the USEPA Drinking Water Health Advisory level.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2011

Distribution of Fecal Indicator Bacteria along the Malibu, California, Coastline

Each year, over 550 million people visit California's public beaches. To protect beach-goers from exposure to waterborne disease, California state law requires water-quality monitoring for fecal indicator bacteria (FIB), such as enterococci and Escherichia coli (E. coli), at beaches having more than 50,000 yearly visitors. FIB are used to assess the microbiological quality of water because, although not typically disease causing, they are correlated with the occurrence of certain waterborne diseases. Tests show that FIB concentrations occasionally exceed U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) public health standards for recreational water in Malibu Lagoon and at several Malibu beaches (Regional Water Quality Control Board, 2009). Scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS) California Water Science Center are doing a study to identify the distribution and sources of FIB in coastal Malibu waters (fig. 1). The study methods were similar to those used in a study of FIB contamination on beaches in the Santa Barbara, California, area (Izbicki and others, 2009). This report describes the study approach and presents preliminary results used to evaluate the distribution and source of FIB in the Malibu area. Results of this study will help decision-makers address human health issues associated with FIB contamination in Malibu, and the methods used in this study can be used in other coastal areas affected by FIB contamination.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2017

Continued geophysical logging near the GMH Electronics National Priorities List Superfund site near Roxboro, North Carolina

The U.S. Geological Survey South Atlantic Water Science Center collected borehole geophysical logs and images and continuous water-level data near the GMH Electronics National Priorities List Superfund site near Roxboro, North Carolina, during December 2012 through July 2015. Previous work by the U.S. Geological Survey South Atlantic Water Science Center at the site involved the collection of borehole geophysical log data in 15 wells, in addition to surface geologic mapping and passive diffusion bag sampling. In a continued effort to assist the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in developing a conceptual groundwater model to assess current contaminant distribution and future migration of contaminants, more than 900 subsurface features (primarily fracture orientations) in 10 open borehole wells were delineated and continuous water-level data information from 14 monitoring wells within close proximity of the initially drilled boreholes was collected to observe any induced water-level fluctuations during drilling operations

North Carolina↗
USGS2002

The U.S. Geological Survey and the Chesapeake Bay – The role of science in environmental restoration

The Chesapeake Bay is the Nation's largest estuary and historically supported one of the most productive fisheries in the world. In addition to supporting aquatic communities and wildlife, the bay's watershed serves the economic and recreational needs of 15 million people. The fertile soils of the watershed support significant agricultural production. Unfortunately, the commercial, economic, and recreational value of the bay and its watershed has been degraded by poor water quality, loss of habitat, and overharvesting of living resources. Since the early 1980's, the Chesapeake Bay Program, which is a partnership among Maryland, Virginia, Pennsylvania, the District of Columbia, the Federal Government, and the Chesapeake Bay Commission, has been formulating and implementing restoration goals to restore living resources, minimize habitat loss, and reduce the amount of nutrients, sediment, and toxic substances entering the bay. The U.S. Geological Survey has the critical role of providing unbiased scientific information to be used in helping to formulate, implement, and assess the effectiveness of restoration goals in the bay and its watershed.

Chesapeake Bay watershed↗
USGS2013

U.S. Geological Survey ecosystems science strategy—Advancing discovery and application through collaboration

Executive Summary Ecosystem science is critical to making informed decisions about natural resources that can sustain our Nation’s economic and environmental well-being. Resource managers and policymakers are faced with countless decisions each year at local, regional, and national levels on issues as diverse as renewable and nonrenewable energy development, agriculture, forestry, water supply, and resource allocations at the urban-rural interface. The urgency for sound decisionmaking is increasing dramatically as the world is being transformed at an unprecedented pace and in uncertain directions. Environmental changes are associated with natural hazards, greenhouse gas emissions, and increasing demands for water, land, food, energy, mineral, and living resources. At risk is the Nation’s environmental capital, the goods and services provided by resilient ecosystems that are vital to the health and wellbeing of human societies. Ecosystem science—the study of systems of organisms interacting with their environment and the consequences of natural and human-induced change on these systems—is necessary to inform decisionmakers as they develop policies to adapt to these changes. This Ecosystems Science Strategy is built on a framework that includes basic and applied science. It highlights the critical roles that U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists and partners can play in building scientific understanding and providing timely information to decisionmakers. The strategy underscores the connection between scientific discoveries and the application of new knowledge, and it integrates ecosystem science and decisionmaking, producing new scientific outcomes to assist resource managers and providing public benefits. We envision the USGS as a leader in integrating scientific information into decisionmaking processes that affect the Nation’s natural resources and human well-being. The USGS is uniquely positioned to play a pivotal role in ecosystem science. With its wide range of expertise, the Bureau can bring holistic, cross-scale, interdisciplinary capabilities to the design and conduct of monitoring, research, and modeling and to new technologies for data collection, management, and visualization. Collectively, these capabilities can be used to reveal ecological patterns and processes, explain how and why ecosystems change, and forecast change over different spatial and temporal scales. USGS science can provide managers with options and decision-support tools to use resources sustainably. The USGS has long-standing, collaborative relationships with the Department of the Interior (DOI) and other partners in the natural sciences, in both conducting science and applying the results. The USGS engages these partners in cooperative investigations that otherwise would lack the necessary support or be too expensive for a single bureau to conduct. The heart of this strategy is a framework for USGS ecosystems science that focuses on five long-term goals, which are seen as interconnected components that reinforce our vision of the USGS providing science that is at the forefront of decisionmaking: Improve understanding of ecosystem structure, function, and processes. The focus for this goal is an understanding of how ecosystems work, including the dynamics of species, their populations, interactions, and genetics, and how they change across spatial and temporal scales. Advance understanding of how drivers influence ecosystem change. The challenges here are explaining the drivers of ecosystem change, their spatio-temporal patterns, their uncertainties and interactions, and their influence on ecosystem processes and dynamics. Improve understanding of the services that ecosystems provide to society. Here the emphasis is on the measurement of environmental capital and ecosystem services, and the identification of sources and patterns of change in space and time. Develop tools, technologies, and capacities to inform decisionmaking about ecosystems. This includes developing new technologies and approaches for conducting applications-oriented ecosystem science. A principal challenge will be how to quantify uncertainty and incorporate it in decision analysis. Apply science to enhance strategies for management, conservation, and restoration of ecosystems. These challenges include development of novel approaches to monitoring, assessment, and restoration of ecosystems; new methods to address species of concern and communities at risk; and innovations in decision analysis and support to address imminent ecosystem changes or those that are underway. Closely integrated with the five goals are four strategic approaches that provide the path forward for the USGS Ecosystems Mission Area. These approaches cross-cut all of the goals and are seen as essential to the implementation of this strategy: Assess information needs for ecosystem science through enhanced partnerships. Work with the DOI and other agencies and institutions to identify, design, and implement priority decision-driven ecological research. Promote the use of interdisciplinary ecosystem science. Design and conduct interdisciplinary process-oriented research in ecosystem science. Enhance modeling and forecasting. Build models to forecast ecosystem change, assess future management scenarios, and reduce uncertainties through an adaptive learning process. Support decisionmaking. Use quantitative approaches to assess the vulnerabilities of ecosystems, habitats, and species, and evaluate strategies for adaptation, restoration, and sustainable management. Following the four strategic approaches are a set of proposed actions that represent a sampling of specific USGS activities that align with this strategy and that address the Nation’s most pressing environmental needs. The strategy emphasizes coordination of activities across the USGS mission areas pursuant to these goals. Ecosystem science is inherently interdisciplinary and requires a broad perspective that incorporates the biological and physical sciences, climate science, information technology, and scientific capacity in mission areas across the Bureau. With its emphasis on coordination, this strategy can provide a critical underpinning for integrated science efforts with scientists from multiple mission areas of the USGS working together. Of course, the USGS will continue to conduct discipline-specific and interdisciplinary investigations, and both will continue to be vital parts of the ecosystem science portfolio. Finally, the strategy stresses the importance of coordination with other Federal agencies and organizations in the natural resources community. The USGS collaborates with resource agencies in the DOI and other organizations throughout the world to meet societal needs for species and ecosystem management. Working with these agencies and organizations, the USGS will play a key role in guiding sound decisionmaking during the next decade by advancing the scientific foundation for sustaining the natural resources that diverse, productive, resilient ecosystems provide.

Circular↗
USGS2024

Prioritizing US Geological Survey science on salinization and salinity in candidate and selected priority river basins

The US Geological Survey (USGS) is selecting and prioritizing basins, known as Integrated Water Science basins, for monitoring and intensive study. Previous efforts to aid in this selection process include a scientifically defensible and quantitative assessment of basins facing human-caused water resource challenges (Van Metre et al. in Environmental Monitoring and Assessment , 192(7), 458 2020). In the present work, we explore this ranking process based on water quality considerations, specifically salinity and salinization. We selected top candidate basins to study salinity and salinization issues in 18 hydrologic regions that include 163 candidate basins. Our prioritization is based on quantitative assessment of sources of salinity, drivers of change, and receptors that must respond to those sources and drivers. Source terms represented in the prioritization include geology, depth to brackish groundwater, stream conductivity, chloride in precipitation, urban and agricultural land use, application of road salt as a deicer, and irrigation. Drivers represented in prioritization include changes in chemical weathering as a result of changes in rainwater chemistry. Receptors include measures of water stress, measurements of stream ecological health, and socioeconomic factors. In addition, we present research activities for the USGS on salinity and salinization that can be pursued in these basins including assessment of sources, pathways, and loadings; predicting and understanding changes in sources, peaks, and trends; understanding the components of salinity and mobilization of contaminants; understanding the relationship between salinization and changing ecosystems; and developing knowledge on the causes and distribution of groundwater salinity, brackish water resources, and challenges related to desalination.

Enviornmental Monitoring and Assessment↗
USGS2011

Geologic map of Big Bend National Park, Texas

The purpose of this map is to provide the National Park Service and the public with an updated digital geologic map of Big Bend National Park (BBNP). The geologic map report of Maxwell and others (1967) provides a fully comprehensive account of the important volcanic, structural, geomorphological, and paleontological features that define BBNP. However, the map is on a geographically distorted planimetric base and lacks topography, which has caused difficulty in conducting GIS-based data analyses and georeferencing the many geologic features investigated and depicted on the map. In addition, the map is outdated, excluding significant data from numerous studies that have been carried out since its publication more than 40 years ago. This report includes a modern digital geologic map that can be utilized with standard GIS applications to aid BBNP researchers in geologic data analysis, natural resource and ecosystem management, monitoring, assessment, inventory activities, and educational and recreational uses. The digital map incorporates new data, many revisions, and greater detail than the original map. Although some geologic issues remain unresolved for BBNP, the updated map serves as a foundation for addressing those issues. Funding for the Big Bend National Park geologic map was provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program and the National Park Service. The Big Bend mapping project was administered by staff in the USGS Geology and Environmental Change Science Center, Denver, Colo. Members of the USGS Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center completed investigations in parallel with the geologic mapping project. Results of these investigations addressed some significant current issues in BBNP and the U.S.-Mexico border region, including contaminants and human health, ecosystems, and water resources. Funding for the high-resolution aeromagnetic survey in BBNP, and associated data analyses and interpretation, was from the USGS Crustal Geophysics and Geochemistry Science Center. Mapping contributed from university professors and students was mostly funded by independent sources, including academic institutions, private industry, and other agencies.

Texas↗
USGS2018

Agriculture — A river runs through it — The connections between agriculture and water quality

Sustaining the quality of the Nation’s water resources and the health of our diverse ecosystems depends on the availability of sound water-resources data and information to develop effective, science-based policies. Effective management of water resources also brings more certainty and efficiency to important economic sectors. Taken together, these actions lead to immediate and longterm economic, social, and environmental benefits that make a difference to the lives of the almost 400 million people projected to live in the United States by 2050. In 1991, Congress established the U.S. Geological Survey National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) to address where, when, why, and how the Nation’s water quality has changed, or is likely to change in the future, in response to human activities and natural factors. Since then, NAWQA has been a leading source of scientific data and knowledge used by national, regional, state, and local agencies to develop science-based policies and management strategies to improve and protect water resources used for drinking water, recreation, irrigation, energy development, and ecosystem needs. Plans for the third decade of NAWQA (2013–23) address priority water-quality issues and science needs identified by NAWQA stakeholders, such as the Advisory Committee on Water Information and the National Research Council, and are designed to meet increasing challenges related to population growth, increasing needs for clean water, and changing land-use and weather patterns. This report is one of a series of publications, The Quality of Our Nation’s Waters , which describes major findings of the NAWQA Project on water-quality issues of regional and national concern and provides science-based information for assessing and managing the quality of our groundwater resources. Other reports in this series focus on occurrence and distribution of nutrients, pesticides, and volatile organic compounds in streams and groundwater, the effects of contaminants and stream-flow alteration on the condition of aquatic communities in streams, and on the quality of groundwater from private domestic and public supply wells. Each reports builds toward a more comprehensive understanding of the quality of regional and national water resources. All NAWQA reports are available online ( https://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/bib/ ). We hope this publication will provide you with insights and information to meet your water-resource needs and will foster increased citizen awareness and involvement in the protection and restoration of our Nation’s waters. The information in this report is intended primarily for those interested or involved in resource management and protection, conservation, regulation, and policymaking at the regional and national levels.

Circular↗
USGS2012

Introduction to emergent wetlands: Chapter A in Emergent wetlands status and trends in the northern Gulf of Mexico: 1950-2010

Throughout the past century, emergent wetlands have been declining across the Gulf of Mexico. Emergent wetland ecosystems provide a plethora of resources including plant and wildlife habitat, commercial and recreational economic activity, water quality improvement, and natural barriers against storms. As emergent wetland losses increase, so does the need for information on the causes and effects of these losses, for emergent wetland mapping, for monitoring and restoration efforts, and for increased education. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Gulf of Mexico Program Office (EPA GMPO) are committed to providing the best science to restore, enhance, and protect these important ecosystems. The Emergent Wetlands Status and Trends Report is a continuation of the completed Seagrass Status and Trends in the Northern Gulf of Mexico Report (Handley and others, 2007), both of which serve to update the EPA GMPO Status and Trends of Emergent and Submerged Vegetated Habitats of Gulf of Mexico Coastal Waters, USA Report (Duke and Kruczynski, 1992). The Emergent Wetlands Status and Trends Report is also part of the Gulf of Mexico Alliance Ecosystems Integration and Assessment Priority Issue Team’s work plan to provide resources that will aid in the ecological and economic enhancement of the Gulf of Mexico region. The purpose of this report is to provide scientists, managers, and citizens with valuable baseline information on the status and trends of emergent wetlands along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico. The study upon which this report is based examines the emergent wetlands of eight individual estuarine areas within the northern Gulf of Mexico region and presents statewide summaries for Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida. Each estuarine area is detailed in vignettes that address current status and historical trends of estuarine and palustrine emergent wetlands, emergent wetlands mapping and monitoring, causes of status change, restoration and enhancement activities, background information for the study area, and the methodology employed to analyze and document the historical trends and current status of emergent wetlands. The eight individual estuarine areas examined in this report are:  Corpus Christi/ Nueces/Aransas Bays, Tex.  Galveston Bay, Tex.  Barataria/Terrebonne Bay, La.  Mississippi Delta, La.  Mississippi Sound, Miss.  Mobile Bay, Ala.  Florida Panhandle, Fla.  Tampa Bay, Fla.

Report↗
USGS2020

Simulation of discharge, water-surface elevations, and water temperatures for the St. Louis River estuary, Minnesota-Wisconsin, 2016–17

The St. Louis River estuary is a large freshwater estuary, next to Duluth, Minnesota, that encompasses the headwaters of Lake Superior. The St. Louis River estuary is one of the most complex and compromised near-shore systems in the upper Great Lakes with a long history of environmental contamination caused by logging, mining, paper mills, and other heavy industrial activities. Presently (2020), a widely available, science-based assessment tool capable of evaluating ecosystem-level responses to remediation and restoration projects has not existed for the estuary. To address this need, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) built a predictive, mechanistic, three-dimensional hydrodynamic model for the estuary using the Environmental Fluid Dynamics Code framework. In the current version, the model can simulate continuous discharge, water-surface elevations, water temperature, and flow velocity, although the modular framework allows for future additions of water-quality modeling. The model was calibrated using data collected from April 2016 through November 2016 and validated with data collected from April 2017 through November 2017. The four types of data used to evaluate model performance were water-surface elevations, discharge, water temperature, and flow velocities. Streamflow and temperature boundary condition data included a mixture of USGS streamgage data, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources gage data, and estimates derived from the gage data. The model was able to simulate the water-surface elevations with generally good agreement between the simulated and measured values for both years at the daily time step. Specifically, the model was able to demonstrate excellent agreement with the measured data with Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency coefficients greater than 0.8 for all three locations; however, the model was unable to produce hourly water-surface elevations with such accuracy for 2016–17. Discharge was more dynamic than the water-surface elevations, both for the measured and simulated data. Generally, most of the discharge ranged from −650 to 1,200 cubic meters per second, but the constantly changing flux exiting the estuary into Lake Superior (positive flows) and entering the estuary from Lake Superior (negative flows) occurred throughout the year. Even upstream at the St. Louis River at Oliver, Wisconsin, gage (USGS station 0402403250), the effect of flows into the estuary from Lake Superior did occur, demonstrating the strong effect of the Lake Superior seiche on flows for the estuary. From a performance standpoint, the model was able to simulate discharge with generally good agreement in both years, although the 2017 validation was better than the 2016 calibration period. For the daily Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency coefficients, the simulated values were 0.98, 0.62, 0.49, and 0.71 for the Oliver gage; the Superior Bay entry channel at Superior, Wisc., (USGS station 464226092005600); the Superior Bay Duluth Ship Canal at Duluth, Minn., (USGS station 464646092052900); and total entries (combination of the Superior entry and Duluth entry), respectively. For the hourly evaluation criteria, the model performed poorly, with Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency coefficients less than 0 for the two entries into Lake Superior; therefore, as a predictor of discharge at the hourly scale, the model performed worse than using the measured data average. Similar to discharge, the model was a good predictor of flow velocity at the daily time scale but had difficulty matching the measured data at the hourly scale. For discharge and flow velocity, matching at subdaily time steps for a system as complicated as the St. Louis River estuary is considered difficult because the match is highly sensitive to coordinating the exact measurement location to the simulated value. The final calibration target was water temperature, calibrated for the Oliver gage and the Duluth entry. For calibration purposes, the Duluth entry was the more important water temperature target because the Oliver gage was more of an internal check on the model. The Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency coefficients for the Duluth entry were high; hourly Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency coefficients at the Duluth entry were either at or greater than 0.7 for both years, and daily values were 0.84 and 0.82 for 2016 and 2017, respectively.

Minnesota, Wisconsin↗
USGS2018

Understanding the influence of nutrients on stream ecosystems in agricultural landscapes

Sustaining the quality of the Nation’s water resources and the health of our diverse ecosystems depends on the availability of sound water-resources data and information to develop effective, science-based policies. Effective management of water resources also brings more certainty and efficiency to important economic sectors. Taken together, these actions lead to immediate and long-term economic, social, and environmental benefits that make a difference to the lives of the almost 400 million people projected to live in the United States by 2050. In 1991, Congress established the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) to address where, when, why, and how the Nation’s water quality has changed, or is likely to change in the future, in response to human activities and natural factors. Since then, NAWQA has been a leading source of scientific data and knowledge used by national, regional, State, and local agencies to develop science-based policies and management strategies to improve and protect water resources used for drinking water, recreation, irrigation, energy development, and ecosystem needs ( https://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/applications/ ). Plans for the third decade of NAWQA (2013–23) address priority water-quality issues and science needs identified by NAWQA stakeholders, such as the Advisory Committee on Water Information and the National Research Council, and are designed to meet increasing challenges related to population growth, increasing needs for clean water, and changing land-use and weather patterns. Excess nutrients are a pervasive problem of streams, lakes, and coastal waters. The current report, “The Quality of Our Nation’s Waters—Understanding the Effects of Nutrients on Stream Ecosystems in Agricultural Landscapes,” presents a summary of results from USGS investigations conducted from 2003 to 2011 on processes that influence nutrients and how nutrient enrichment can alter biological components of agricultural streams. This study included collecting data from 232 sites distributed among eight study areas. This report summarizes findings on processes that influence nutrients and how nutrient enrichment can alter biological communities in agricultural streams. These findings are relevant to local, State, regional, and national decision-makers involved in efforts to (1) better understand the influence of nutrients on agricultural streams, (2) develop nutrient criteria for streams and rivers, (3) reduce nutrients to streams and downstream receiving waters, and (4) develop tools for tracking nutrient and biological conditions following nutrient reduction strategies. All NAWQA reports are available online at https://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/bib/ . We hope this publication will provide you with insights and information to meet your water-resource needs and will foster increased citizen awareness and involvement in the protection and restoration of our Nation’s waters. The information in this report is intended primarily for those interested or involved in resource management and protection, conservation, regulation, and policymaking at the regional and national levels.

Central Columbia-Yakima River Basins, Great River ↗
USGS2010

Environmental flow studies of the Fort Collins Science Center— Cherry Creek, Arizona

At the request of the U.S. Forest Service, an instream flow assessment was conducted at Cherry Creek, Ariz., to investigate habitat for native and introduced fish species and to describe the beneficial use of a possible instream flow water right. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Fort Collins Science Center performed an intensive field study of two sections of Cherry Creek in September 2008 to provide base data for hydrodynamic simulation of the flow conditions in the stream. The USGS Arizona Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, at the University of Arizona School of Natural Resources, conducted a survey of the habitat requirements of the resident fish species in Cherry Creek and provided the habitat suitability criteria used in this study. The habitat suitability criteria were combined with hydrodynamic simulation results to quantify fish habitat for the full range of daily flow experienced in the creek and to produce maps of habitat occurrence for those flows. The flow record at the Cherry Creek stream gage was used to generate habitat response values over time. The long-term habitat response was incorporated into an Excel (Registered) spreadsheet to allow evaluation of habitat occurrence with and without an instream water right under different hypothetical water withdrawal scenarios. The spreadsheet displays information about the time sequence of habitat events, the duration of critical events, and habitat retention.

Arizona↗
USGS2014

Great Lakes restoration success through science: U.S. Geological Survey accomplishments 2010 through 2013

The Great Lakes (Superior, Michigan, Huron, Erie, and Ontario) are the largest group of freshwater lakes on Earth and serve as an important source of drinking water, transportation, power, and recreational opportunities for the United States and Canada. They also support an abundant commercial and recreational fishery, are crucial for agriculture, and are essential to the economic vitality of the region. The Great Lakes support a wealth of biological diversity, including over 200 globally rare plants and animals and more than 40 species that are found nowhere else in the world. However, more than a century of environmental degradation has taken a substantial toll on the Great Lakes. To stimulate and promote the goal of a healthy Great Lakes region, President Obama and Congress created the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) in 2009. The GLRI is an interagency collaboration that seeks to address the most significant environmental problems in the Great Lakes ecosystem. The GLRI is composed of five focus areas that address these issues: Cleaning up toxic substances and Areas of Concern, Preventing and controlling invasive species, Promoting nearshore health, Protecting and restoring habitat and wildlife, Tracking progress and working with partners. As of August 2013, the GLRI had funded more than 1,500 projects and programs of the highest priority to meet immediate cleanup, restoration, and protection needs. These projects use scientific analyses as the basis for identifying the restoration needs and priorities for the GLRI. Results from the science, monitoring, and other on-the-ground actions by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) provide the scientific information needed to help guide the Great Lakes restoration efforts. This document highlights a selection of USGS projects for each of the five focus areas through 2013, demonstrating the importance of science for restoration success. Additional information for these and other USGS projects that are important for Great Lakes restoration is available at http://cida.usgs.gov/glri/glri-catalog/ .

Great Lakes↗
USGS1999

The east coast petroleum province: Science and society

The U.S. Atlantic offshore, especially the mid-Atlantic, was an exciting exploration area from the 1970s into the 1980s. Much pioneering 'frontier' activity in both scientific and policy matters occurred in this area. Although production was not achieved, objective geological evidence indicates that the province does have potential. Major population centers of the mid-Atlantic area demand large amounts of energy and enormous amounts of crude and product are shipped through East Coast waters. Nevertheless, exploration has been shut down by moratoria, environmental concerns, and international pricing. It is suggested that the province will be revisited in the future and that the geologic and environmental information that has been generated at great cost should be preserved for use by the next generation of explorationists and policy-makers.

Northeastern Geology and Environmental Sciences↗