Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Environmental Impact Assessment Review”

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
USGS2025

Exposure of infants to antibiotics via cord blood, breast milk, and formula: A review on exposure level, temporal variation, and risk assessment

The pervasive use of antibiotics across various sectors, including agriculture, medicine, and aquaculture, has led to a notable increase in environmental antibiotic residues. This phenomenon has raised significant public concern regarding the potential health risks antibiotics may pose, particularly to vulnerable populations such as infants. However, the conceptualization of exposure routes of antibiotics to infants and the associated health risks has not been conducted. This review summarized three main pathways infants are exposed to antibiotics, including umbilical cord blood, breast milk, and infant formula. Antibiotic exposure levels in infants were synthesized, examining spatial and temporal trends in antibiotic concentrations across different media through clinical testing. We also analyzed the doses of antibiotics consumed by infants over time through breast milk and formula, evaluating the associated risks. Furthermore, we explored the potential adverse effects of early-life antibiotic exposure on the infant gut microbiota, physical development, and multiple organ systems. Given the global significance of antibiotic distribution, it is pertinent to comprehensively monitor antibiotic concentrations in infants and conduct longitudinal follow-up studies on their growth and development, accurately quantifying and assessing the impacts on fetal and infant health.

Journal of Hazardous Materials↗
USGS2022

Ocean acidification in the Gulf of Mexico: Drivers, impacts, and unknowns

Ocean acidification (OA) has resulted in global-scale changes in ocean chemistry, which can disturb marine organisms and ecosystems. Despite its extensively populated coastline, many marine-dependent communities, and valuable economies, the Gulf of Mexico (GOM) remains a relatively understudied region with respect to acidification. In general, the warm waters of the GOM are better buffered from acidification compared to higher latitude seas, yet long-term acidification has been documented in several GOM regions. OA within the GOM is recognized as spatially variable, particularly within the coastal zone where numerous physical and biogeochemical processes contribute to carbonate chemistry dynamics. The historical progression of OA within the entire GOM is difficult to assess because only a few dedicated long-term monitoring sites have recently been established, and full-water column observations are limited. However, environmental drivers on smaller scales that affect GOM acidification were found to include freshwater, nutrient, and carbonate discharge from large rivers; ocean warming, circulation and residence times; and episodic extreme weather events. GOM marine ecosystems provide essential services, including coastline protection and carbon dioxide removal, and habitats for many marine species that are economically and ecologically important. However, organismal and ecosystem responses to OA are not well constrained for the GOM due to a lack of studies examining the specific effects of OA on regionally relevant species under contemporary and projected conditions. Tackling the vast number of remaining scientific unknowns in this region can be best coordinated through regional capacity networks, such as the Gulf of Mexico Coastal Acidification Network (GCAN), working to achieve a system-wide understanding of Gulf OA and its impacts. Here we synthesize the current peer-reviewed literature on GOM acidification across the ocean-estuarine continuum and identify critical knowledge, research, and monitoring gaps that require future attention.

Progress in Oceanography↗
USGS2012

Impacts of climate change on biodiversity, ecosystems, and ecosystem services: technical input to the 2013 National Climate Assessment

Ecosystems, and the biodiversity and services they support, are intrinsically dependent on climate. During the twentieth century, climate change has had documented impacts on ecological systems, and impacts are expected to increase as climate change continues and perhaps even accelerates. This technical input to the National Climate Assessment synthesizes our scientific understanding of the way climate change is affecting biodiversity, ecosystems, ecosystem services, and what strategies might be employed to decrease current and future risks. Building on past assessments of how climate change and other stressors are affecting ecosystems in the United States and around the world, we approach the subject from several different perspectives. First, we review the observed and projected impacts on biodiversity, with a focus on genes, species, and assemblages of species. Next, we examine how climate change is affecting ecosystem structural elements—such as biomass, architecture, and heterogeneity—and functions—specifically, as related to the fluxes of energy and matter. People experience climate change impacts on biodiversity and ecosystems as changes in ecosystem services; people depend on ecosystems for resources that are harvested, their role in regulating the movement of materials and disturbances, and their recreational, cultural, and aesthetic value. Thus, we review newly emerging research to determine how human activities and a changing climate are likely to alter the delivery of these ecosystem services. This technical input also examines two cross-cutting topics. First, we recognize that climate change is happening against the backdrop of a wide range of other environmental and anthropogenic stressors, many of which have caused dramatic ecosystem degradation already. This broader range of stressors interacts with climate change, and complicates our abilities to predict and manage the impacts on biodiversity, ecosystems, and the services they support. The second cross-cutting topic is the rapidly advancing field of climate adaptation, where there has been significant progress in developing the conceptual framework, planning approaches, and strategies for safeguarding biodiversity and other ecological resources. At the same time, ecosystem-based adaptation is becoming more prominent as a way to utilize ecosystem services to help human systems adapt to climate change. In this summary, we present key findings of the technical input, focusing on themes that can be found throughout the report. Thus, this summary takes a more integrated look at the question of how climate change is affecting our ecological resources, the implications for humans, and possible response strategies. This integrated approach better reflects the impacts of climate in the real world, where changes in ecosystem structure or function will alter the viability of different species and the efficacy of ecosystem services. Likewise, adaptation to climate change will simultaneously address a range of conservation goals. Case studies are used to illustrate this complete picture throughout the report; a snapshot of one case study, 2011 Las Conchas, New Mexico Fire , is included in this summary.

Report↗
USGS2025

Ambient field seismology in critical zone hydrological sciences

Passive ambient noise monitoring is an emerging tool in environmental seismology, leveraging the ambient seismic field to assess temporal variations in shallow subsurface properties. This review focuses on the potential and challenges of using scattered coda waves from noise correlation functions to monitor critical zone dynamics. The sensitivity of seismic velocities to various environmental factors, including precipitation, snowmelt, atmospheric pressure, and groundwater fluctuations, underscores the method’s versatility. While coda waves excel in detecting subtle changes due to their scattered nature, ballistic waves provide higher spatial resolution, albeit with challenges in source stability. Advances in seismic sensing, including distributed acoustic sensing and low-cost geophone networks, have enabled high-resolution monitoring of hydrological processes, subsurface deformation, and seismic hazards. Integrating seismic data with hydrological models provides insights into water storage, pore pressure changes, and soil moisture dynamics. However, limitations in spatial resolution, calibration with ground truth data, and coupled effects between environmental factors remain key challenges. This review emphasizes the importance of interdisciplinary approaches in refining methodologies, enhancing sensor deployments, and addressing data gaps. Passive seismic monitoring offers opportunities to understand critical zone processes and their broader impacts on seismic hazards and environmental sustainability.

Comptes Rendus. Géoscience↗
USGS2014

Hydrogeology of the Old Faithful area, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, and its relevance to natural resources and infrastructure

A panel of leading experts (The Old Faithful Science Review Panel) was convened by Yellowstone National Park (YNP) to review and summarize the geological and hydrological understanding that can inform National Park Service management of the Upper Geyser Basin area. We give an overview of present geological and hydrological knowledge of the Old Faithful hydrothermal (hot water) system and related thermal areas in the Upper Geyser Basin. We prioritize avenues for improving our understanding of key knowledge gaps that limit informed decision-making regarding human use in this fragile natural landscape. Lastly, we offer guidelines to minimize impacts to the hydrothermal system that could be used to aid decisions by park management. Old Faithful sits within the Upper Geyser Basin, an area of abundant hydrothermal activity where boiling waters extend from the surface to significant depth within glacial sediments and underlying volcanic rocks. The geyser systems are directly fed by waters recharged decades to millennia ago, which are surrounded by colder, younger waters. Activity of the geysers is controlled by complex subsurface plumbing with fractures and conduits separated by regions of low permeability. Observations over the past century indicate that the thermal areas and their features are both fragile and highly dynamic. Although Old Faithful has erupted regularly for the past 150 years, it exhibits changes in eruptive behavior over time, and the average interval between eruptions has increased by about 50 percent over the past 50 years. It is clear that human activity has modified the hydrothermal system in the past; conversely, natural features pose ongoing hazards to humans and human infrastructure. Current (2014) long-term programs to measure heat discharge by chloride-flux monitoring, and more recently by thermal-infrared imaging, are crucial for assessing the status of the hydrothermal system. Complementary studies could include airborne resistivity, environmental tracers, numerical modeling, and greater emphasis on measuring the discharge of water during geyser eruptions. Such data are needed to better understand the subsurface plumbing systems that feed the geysers. Further understanding can be gained through installation of shallow groundwater observation wells, surface geophysical studies, and direct measurement of temperature gradients near the surface. It also is critical to archive existing data from all studies in a manner that will be readily accessible to scientists and decision makers. Monitoring and data collection can be achieved through the YNP geology program, by direct funding to other groups, or by encouraging and facilitating externally funded research. There are many documented examples at YNP and elsewhere where human infrastructure and natural thermal features have negatively affected each other. Unless action is taken, human conflicts with the Old Faithful hydrothermal system are likely to increase over the coming years. This is partly because of the increase in park visitation over the past decades, but also because the interval between eruptions of Old Faithful has increased, lengthening the time spent (and services needed) for each visitor at Old Faithful. To avoid an increase in visitor impacts, the National Park Service should consider 2 alternate strategies to accommodate people, vehicles, and services in the Upper Geyser Basin, such as shuttle services from staging (parking and dining) areas with little or no recent hydrothermal activity. We further suggest that YNP consider a zone system to guide maintenance and development of infrastructure in the immediate Old Faithful area. A “red” zone includes hydrothermally active land where new development is discouraged and existing infrastructure is modified with great care. An outer “green” zone represents areas where cooler temperatures and less hydrothermal flow are thought to exist, and where development and maintenance could proceed as occurs elsewhere in the park. An intermediate “yellow” zone would require preliminary assessment of subsurface temperatures and gas concentrations to assess suitability for infrastructure development. The panel recommends that YNP management follow the lead of the National Park System Advisory Board Science Committee (2012) by applying the “precautionary principle” when making decisions regarding the interaction of hydrothermal phenomena and park infrastructure in the Old Faithful area and other thermal areas within YNP.

Wyoming↗
USGS2015

Final project memorandum: sea-level rise modeling handbook: resource guide for resource managers, engineers, and scientists

Coastal wetlands of the Southeastern United States are undergoing retreat and migration from increasing tidal inundation and saltwater intrusion attributed to climate variability and sea-level rise. Much of the literature describing potential sea-level rise projections and modeling predictions are found in peer-reviewed academic journals or government technical reports largely suited to reading by other Ph.D. scientists who are more familiar or engaged in the climate change debate. Various sea-level rise and coastal wetland models have been developed and applied of different designs and scales of spatial and temporal complexity for predicting habitat and environmental change that have not heretofore been synthesized to aid natural resource managers of their utility and limitations. Training sessions were conducted with Federal land managers with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, and NOAA National Estuarine Research Reserves as well as state partners and nongovernmental organizations across the northern Gulf Coast from Florida to Texas to educate and to evaluate user needs and understanding of concepts, data, and modeling tools for projecting sea-level rise and its impact on coastal habitats and wildlife. As a result, this handbook was constructed from these training and feedback sessions with coastal managers and biologists of published decision-support tools and simulation models for sea-level rise and climate change assessments. A simplified tabular context was developed listing the various kinds of decision-support tools and ecological models along with criteria to distinguish the source, scale, and quality of information input and geographic data sets, physical and biological constraints and relationships, datum characteristics of water and land elevation components, utility options for setting sea-level rise and climate change scenarios, and ease or difficulty of storing, displaying, or interpreting model output. The handbook is designed to be a primer to understanding sea-level rise and a practical synthesis of the current state of knowledge and modeling tools as a resource guide for DOl land management needs and facilitating Landscape Conservation Cooperative (LCC) research and conservation initiatives.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2020

Wind, sun, and wildlife: Do wind and solar energy development “short-circuit” conservation in the western United States?

Despite the trade-offs between renewable energy development, land use, humans, and wildlife, wind and solar development continues to transform the southwestern US into a green energy landscape. While renewable energy reduces carbon emissions and reliance on fossil fuels, many studies have emerged on the associated ecological and social impacts of this technology. Here, we review the current state of knowledge on the nexus between wildlife conservation and energy development in the western US since 2010. We revisit pertinent ecological concepts and questions presented in earlier reviews to assess how far the field has progressed in mitigating negative effects. Specifically, we ask, what density or design of development maximizes energy benefits while minimizing negative effects on wildlife, whether the results of previously-deficient before-after control-impact studies are now more readily-available, and ultimately, can the impacts of renewable energy development on wildlife be mitigated? We also provide a case study on the federally-protected Desert Tortoise, a conservation-reliant species in the Desert Southwest US, to highlight efforts to mitigate the negative effects of renewable energy development. Our review concludes that successful mitigation is possible via use of spatial decision support tools, applying novel wildlife deterrence and detection systems developed for existing installed facilities, and incorporating impact studies that provide managers with conservation metrics for evaluating different future development land-use scenarios.

Environmental Research Letters↗
USGS2026

Colocating artificial intelligence data centers with energy infrastructure on Federal public lands—A science synthesis and spatial analysis to inform decision making

Executive Summary Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming industries and economies, creating an urgent need to strategically plan for the energy and infrastructure required to support increasing AI use. U.S. Federal agencies and bureaus have been directed to explore ways to accelerate permitting, development, and deployment of energy resources and AI technologies, including encouraging the colocation of energy infrastructure and data centers. To inform these initiatives, this report synthesizes relevant scientific information and presents a spatial analysis of existing energy infrastructure and data centers on or near U.S. Federal public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The purpose of this science synthesis and spatial analysis is to provide the BLM with foundational information for considering potential colocation of data centers with energy infrastructure on Federal public lands to support evidence-based decisions. Additionally, this report provides insight into current (2025) and potential future energy demands by providing projections of a range of potential future environmental conditions relevant to maintaining industry-recommended cooling temperature standards necessary for efficient data center operations. As a part of this effort, a rapid response literature review was conducted of the best available science on the topic of data center development and energy infrastructure in July–August 2025, supplemented by additional resources recommended by U.S. Federal agency and bureau subject matter experts (hereafter experts; including the U.S. Department of Energy National Laboratory of the Rockies) and peer reviewers. To better understand current conditions relevant to AI data center development, a spatial analysis was conducted across Alaska and 11 States in the Western United States, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming, all of which contain extensive BLM-managed surface lands (hereafter referred to as “BLM lands”) that could be considered for the colocation of energy infrastructure and AI data centers. This effort identified BLM lands within 10 miles of existing transmission lines, consistent with methods used in previous BLM programmatic environmental impact statements. This report describes the types of data centers operating within the United States, which vary in ownership, size, technology, and proximity to end users. This report then outlines the primary considerations of data center development, including reliable energy supply, natural resources (such as water availability to support cooling requirements), and relevant policy and regulatory considerations. Energy supply considerations are pivotal for data center operation. Between 2014 and 2018, data centers in the United States accounted for nearly 2 percent of the Nation’s total electricity consumption, and data center energy consumption is projected to increase from 2 to 6.7–12 percent of total U.S. electricity use by 2028. These energy requirements necessitate careful consideration of energy supply when considering potentially suitable locations for data center development. Experts anticipate that an increase in renewable energy generation will likely support most potential future power demand needs, including for data centers, followed by increases in natural gas, nuclear, and geothermal energy production. Additional capacity in the form of battery storage will likely not generate electricity, but may improve the reliability and flexibility of supply, helping to ensure that growing data center loads can be met. However, the U.S. Department of Energy estimates that the United States will need, on average, 57 percent more energy transmission infrastructure by 2035 to account for the growing power demand introduced by development such as data centers. Cooling server equipment in data centers requires large amounts of electricity and water, and this demand can be exacerbated by hot and humid conditions. Energy efficient water-based cooling technologies may reduce electricity consumption onsite but require more water consumption. This additional water demand has the potential to increase water stress and competition with other users. As such, developing data centers will likely need a thorough assessment of current and potential future water availability, as well as consideration of how water demand may change across other sectors. Data center development involves policy and regulatory considerations, as projects must undergo environmental review and authorization processes that can take 18–24 months. Coordinating these environmental reviews and authorizations with other energy development projects, such as building new transmission lines, may cause additional delays. Recent efforts by the U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Department of the Interior aim to expedite environmental reviews and authorizations and improve coordination across agencies. The spatial analysis identified 771 existing AI data centers and more than 3,300 power plants. The spatial analysis found that 6 percent of AI data centers and 22 percent of power plants in the Western United States were on or within 1 mile of BLM lands, and California had the largest number of facilities. Most existing AI data centers were near high-voltage transmission lines and close to power plants, supporting efficient energy delivery. More than 90,000,000 acres of BLM lands were within 10 miles of existing high-voltage transmission lines, representing 38 percent of BLM lands in the study area. Available transmission infrastructure and the overlap with BLM lands varied by State, and Alaska had limited overlap compared to the rest of the Western United States. To operate most efficiently, data center temperatures must be at or below 80.6 degrees Fahrenheit. This analysis of future temperature and precipitation projections indicated increasing cooling demands for data centers, particularly in Arizona, California, and Nevada, where rising temperatures are expected to increase energy and operational costs while potentially stressing current regional electrical grid infrastructure. This report highlights relevant energy supply, natural resources, and regulatory considerations for data center development on BLM lands. This report does not provide a comprehensive ecological, regulatory, land suitability, or permitting analysis. The factors described here are contextual considerations only and are not intended to identify, rank, quantify, or recommend optimal areas for data center colocation. This spatial analysis focused solely on energy considerations relevant to data centers and did not consider water availability, critical habitats, BLM National Conservation Lands, areas of cultural or historical significance, and other sensitive resources. These topics are recognized as critical but were not within the scope of this science synthesis and spatial analysis.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2011

A comparison of approaches for estimating relative impacts of nonnative fishes

Lack of standard methods for quantifying impact has hindered risk assessments of high-impact invaders. To understand methodological strengths and weaknesses, we compared five approaches (in parentheses) for quantifying impact of nonnative fishes: reviewing documented impacts in a large-scale database (review); surveying fish biologists regarding three categories of impact (socioeconomic, ecological, abundance); and estimating frequency of occurrence from existing collection records (collection). In addition, we compared game and nongame biologists’ ratings of game and nongame species. Although mean species ratings were generally correlated among approaches, we documented important discrepancies. The review approach required little effort but often inaccurately estimated impact in our study region (Mid-Atlantic United States). Game fishes received lower ratings from the socioeconomic approach, which yielded the greatest consistency among respondents. The ecological approach exhibited lower respondent bias but was sensitive to pre-existing perceptions of high-impact invaders. The abundance approach provided the least-biased assessment of region-specific impact but did not account for differences in per-capita effects among species. The collection approach required the most effort and did not provide reliable estimates of impact. Multiple approaches to assessing a species’ impact are instructive, but impact ratings must be interpreted in the context of methodological strengths and weaknesses and key management issues. A combination of our ecological and abundance approaches may be most appropriate for assessing ecological impact, whereas our socioeconomic approach is more useful for understanding social dimensions. These approaches are readily transferrable to other regions and taxa; if refined, they can help standardize the assessment of impacts of nonnative species.

Environmental Management↗
USGS2014

Polar bears from space: Assessing satellite imagery as a tool to track Arctic wildlife

Development of efficient techniques for monitoring wildlife is a priority in the Arctic, where the impacts of climate change are acute and remoteness and logistical constraints hinder access. We evaluated high resolution satellite imagery as a tool to track the distribution and abundance of polar bears. We examined satellite images of a small island in Foxe Basin, Canada, occupied by a high density of bears during the summer ice-free season. Bears were distinguished from other light-colored spots by comparing images collected on different dates. A sample of ground-truthed points demonstrated that we accurately classified bears. Independent observers reviewed images and a population estimate was obtained using mark- recapture models. This estimate (N: 94; 95% Confidence Interval: 92-105) was remarkably similar to an abundance estimate derived from a line transect aerial survey conducted a few days earlier (N: 102; 95% CI: 69-152). Our findings suggest that satellite imagery is a promising tool for monitoring polar bears on land, with implications for use with other Arctic wildlife. Large scale applications may require development of automated detection processes to expedite review and analysis. Future research should assess the utility of multi-spectral imagery and examine sites with different environmental characteristics.

PLoS ONE↗
USGS2010

Geomorphology of mesophotic coral ecosystems: Current perspectives on morphology, distribution, and mapping strategies

This paper presents a general review of the distribution of mesophotic coral ecosystems (MCEs) in relationship to geomorphology in US waters. It was specifically concerned with the depth range of 30–100 m, where more than 186,000 km2 of potential seafloor area was identified within the US Gulf of Mexico/Florida, Caribbean, and main Hawaiian Islands. The geomorphology of MCEs was largely inherited from a variety of pre-existing structures of highly diverse origins, which, in combination with environmental stress and physical controls, restrict the distribution of MCEs. Sea-level history, along with depositional and erosional processes, played an integral role in formation of MCE settings. However, mapping the distribution of both potential MCE topography/substrate and existing MCE habitat is only beginning. Mapping techniques pertinent to understanding morphology and MCE distributions are discussed throughout this paper. Future investigations need to consider more cost-effective and remote methods (such as autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs) and acoustics) in order to assess the distribution and extent of MCE habitat. Some understanding of the history of known MCEs through coring studies would help understand their initiation and response to environmental change over time, essential for assessing how they may be impacted by future environmental change.

Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Hawai'i, Louisiana, Mis↗
USGS2022

Risk assessment for bull trout introduction into Sullivan Lake and Harvey Creek, northeastern Washington

The Kalispel Tribe of Indians (KT), U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife are engaged in conservation of bull trout ( Salvelinus confluentus ) in the Lake Pend Oreille (LPO) Core Area. The LPO is a complex habitat core area which falls within three states (Montana, Idaho, and Washington) and a tribal entity. As part of the conservation process, KT worked in cooperation with the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) to complete a risk assessment for introduction of bull trout into Sullivan Lake/Harvey Creek, northeastern, Washington. The risk assessment was designed to evaluate potential risks to resident fish species, to bull trout introduced into Sullivan Lake, and to bull trout donor source populations. This risk assessment describes the potential risks associated with pathogens (introduction of pathogens and increased pathogen burden), genetics (such as risk to donor sources, straying and breeding with native bull trout, and introduction of bull-brook hybrids), and ecological interactions (such as predation and competition). Potential donor source populations were identified and evaluated using a qualitative approach based on expert opinion and a decision framework. Literature reviews were completed for fish species composition and abundance in Sullivan Lake basin to assess potential ecological interactions and risks to these populations and to the introduced bull trout. The USGS assessed pathogen risks through two major questions: (1) whether introduced bull trout might bring pathogens into the Sullivan Lake basin that were not previously present and (2) whether the health of introduced bull trout could be adversely affected by pathogens already present in the basin. Assessment of genetic risks included demographic risks to donor source populations, potential for hybridization with native bull trout, and the risk of introducing bull-brook hybrids. Literature reviews were used in conjunction with discussions among regional biologists to identify potential donor source populations and their population attributes. A decision framework was developed by USGS in collaboration with KT biologists that identified desirable population attributes (life history behavior, abundance, population viability, feasibility of collection, and environmental match) associated with donor source populations and established ranking criteria. The population attribute information was used with the (1) decision framework, (2) established ranking criteria, and (3) expert opinion of regional biologists, to assign scores for overall ranking of donor source populations. The LPO source population was the highest ranked and is considered a robust and stable population. The risk of introducing pathogens from LPO into Sullivan Lake via a bull trout introduction program seems low, and indirect pathogen burden risks to resident species can be mitigated using established pathogen surveillance methods. The likelihood that bull trout, introduced into Sullivan Lake, stray and spawn with native bull trout is low. Nearest-neighbor donor source populations, such as LPO, could minimize negative fitness impacts that might occur from straying and interbreeding of individuals that become entrained and help maintain natural patterns of genetic diversity in native populations. The ecological risk that a bull trout introduction presents to resident species seems to be low but with some uncertainty. Pygmy whitefish, a Washington State Sensitive species, is likely most vulnerable to extirpation with increased predation pressure with introduction of an additional piscivore into the ecosystem. The status of the pygmy whitefish in Sullivan Lake is unknown. The ecological risks most likely to reduce the viability of introduced bull trout are predation by burbot and an adequate forage base in Sullivan Lake. Prior fish surveys provided data on resident species abundance, provided an established baseline for effective monitoring, and identifying ecosystem changes post-bull trout introduction to inform future adaptive management decisions.

Washington↗
USGS2012

National climate assessment technical report on the impacts of climate and land use and land cover change

This technical report responds to the recognition by the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) and the National Climate Assessment (NCA) of the importance of understanding how land use and land cover (LULC) affects weather and climate variability and change and how that variability and change affects LULC. Current published, peer-reviewed, scientific literature and supporting data from both existing and original sources forms the basis for this report's assessment of the current state of knowledge regarding land change and climate interactions. The synthesis presented herein documents how current and future land change may alter environment processes and in turn, how those conditions may affect both land cover and land use by specifically investigating, * The primary contemporary trends in land use and land cover, * The land-use and land-cover sectors and regions which are most affected by weather and climate variability,* How land-use practices are adapting to climate change, * How land-use and land-cover patterns and conditions are affecting weather and climate, and * The key elements of an ongoing Land Resources assessment. These findings present information that can be used to better assess land change and climate interactions in order to better assess land management and adaptation strategies for future environmental change and to assist in the development of a framework for an ongoing national assessment.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2025

Quantifying the substantive influence of public comment on United States federal environmental decisions under NEPA

A citizen’s right to comment on, and criticize, government decisions makes a difference. The U.S. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) institutionalized public engagement in environmental review in the belief it would lead to better decisions and more sustainable outcomes. But, 50 years later, NEPA’s public comment process has been criticized as costly and slow, while doing little to change outcomes. Data science now makes it possible to track progress and evaluate the influence of public participation. We examined 108 environmental impact statement (EIS) processes spanning 22 years. Our analysis revealed that public comments resulted in substantive decision alterations in 62% of cases, with 64% showing modifications to alternatives, 42% showing modifications to mitigation plans and 11% leading to the selection of an entirely new preferred alternative. When federal agencies changed project alternatives (78 EISs), 88% of the time (69 of the 78 EISs) they credited public comments as the reason. In 45 of the 108 EISs, agencies modified mitigation plans and credited public comments as the reason 100% of the time. Agencies only occasionally selected a new preferred alternative (21 out of 104 EISs), but when they did, they credited public comments as the reason 100% of the time. As the United States and the 190+ states and countries that have adopted NEPA’s example consider how to address environmental change, it is important to assess the role of public participation in environmental decision making. Our data say public comments matter.

Environmental Research Letters↗
USGS2007

Modeling the biophysical impacts of global change in mountain biosphere reserves

Mountains and mountain societies provide a wide range of goods and services to humanity, but they are particularly sensitive to the effects of global environmental change. Thus, the definition of appropriate management regimes that maintain the multiple functions of mountain regions in a time of greatly changing climatic, economic, and societal drivers constitutes a significant challenge. Management decisions must be based on a sound understanding of the future dynamics of these systems. The present article reviews the elements required for an integrated effort to project the impacts of global change on mountain regions, and recommends tools that can be used at 3 scientific levels (essential, improved, and optimum). The proposed strategy is evaluated with respect to UNESCO's network of Mountain Biosphere Reserves (MBRs), with the intention of implementing it in other mountain regions as well. First, methods for generating scenarios of key drivers of global change are reviewed, including land use/land cover and climate change. This is followed by a brief review of the models available for projecting the impacts of these scenarios on (1) cryospheric systems, (2) ecosystem structure and diversity, and (3) ecosystem functions such as carbon and water relations. Finally, the cross-cutting role of remote sensing techniques is evaluated with respect to both monitoring and modeling efforts. We conclude that a broad range of techniques is available for both scenario generation and impact assessments, many of which can be implemented without much capacity building across many or even most MBRs. However, to foster implementation of the proposed strategy, further efforts are required to establish partnerships between scientists and resource managers in mountain areas.

Mountain Research and Development↗
USGS2017

Five-year external reviews of the eight Department of Interior Climate Science Centers: Southeast Climate Science Center

In 2008, the U.S. Congress authorized the establishment of the National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center (NCCWSC) within the U.S. Department of Interior (DOI). Housed administratively within the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), NCCWSC is part of the DOI’s ongoing mission to meet the challenges of climate change and its effects on wildlife and aquatic resources. From 2010 through 2012, NCCWSC established eight regional DOI Climate Science Centers (CSCs). Each of these regional CSCs operated with the mission to “synthesize and integrate climate change impact data and develop tools that the Department’s managers and partners can use when managing the Department’s land, water, fish and wildlife, and cultural heritage resources” (Salazar 2009). The model developed by NCCWSC for the regional CSCs employed a dual approach of a federal USGS-staffed component and a parallel host-university component established competitively through a 5-year cooperative agreement with NCCWSC. At the conclusion of this 5-year agreement, a review of each CSC was undertaken, with the Southeast Climate Science Center (SE CSC) review in February 2016. The SE CSC is hosted by North Carolina State University (NCSU) in Raleigh, North Carolina, and is physically housed within the NCSU Department of Applied Ecology along with the Center for Applied Aquatic Ecology, the North Carolina Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit (CFWRU), and the North Carolina Agromedicine Institute. The U.S. Department of Agriculture Southeast Regional Climate Hub is based at NCSU as is the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Southeast Regional Climate Center, the North Carolina Institute for Climate Studies, the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, the NOAA National Weather Service, the State Climate Office of North Carolina, and the U.S. Forest Service Eastern Forest Environmental Threat Assessment Center. This creates a strong core of organizations operating in close proximity focused on climate issues. The geographic area covered by the SE CSC represents all or part of 16 states and the Caribbean Islands and has overlapping boundaries with seven Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs): Appalachian LCC, Eastern Tallgrass Prairie and Big Rivers LCC, Gulf Coast Prairie LCC, Gulf Coastal Plains and Ozarks LCC, Peninsular Florida LCC, South Atlantic LCC, and Caribbean LCC. The SE CSC region also encompasses 134 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service refuges and 89 National Park Service (NPS) units and is home to 11 federally recognized and 54 state recognized tribes.

Report↗
USGS2023

Techniques for restoring damaged Mojave and western Sonoran ecosystems, including those for threatened desert tortoises and Joshua trees

Ecological restoration has potential for contributing to conservation activities for threatened Mojave desert tortoises ( Gopherus agassizii ) and Joshua trees ( Yucca brevifolia , Y. jaegeriana ) and their broader ecosystems in the Mojave and western Sonoran deserts. To be effective, restoration actions deployed strategically need to halt and reverse habitat degradation, replenish or enhance resources used by both species (e.g., large shrubs for protection of tortoises and nurse plants facilitating recruitment of Joshua tree seedlings), and ideally foster resilience during likely future environmental changes. We synthesized restoration techniques and their effectiveness in the Mojave and western Sonoran deserts, provide estimated costs of candidate techniques, and anticipate future research needs for effective restoration in changing climates and environments. Over 50 published studies in the Mojave and western Sonoran deserts demonstrate that restoration can improve soil features (e.g., biocrusts), increase cover of native perennial and annual plants, enhance native seed retention and seed banks, and reduce risk of fires to conserve mature shrubland habitat. We placed restoration techniques into three categories: restoration of site environments, revegetation, and management actions to limit further disturbance and encourage recovery. Within these categories, 11 major restoration techniques (and their variations) were evaluated by at least one published study and range from geomorphic (e.g., reestablishing natural topographic patterns) and abiotic structural treatments (e.g., vertical mulching) to active revegetation (e.g., outplanting, seeding). For example, 16 outplanting studies assessed performance of 46 species to begin identifying top-performing species, associated treatments (e.g., protection from herbivory) required to aid outplant survival, and potential for outplants to trigger formation of self-sustaining populations. Creosote bush (Larrea tridentata), a shrub that tortoises use for cover and that serves as a nurse plant for Joshua tree recruitment, achieved at least 50% survival in five of eight studies. Estimated costs for restoring desert habitats varied primarily with the severity of the disturbance, site factors including the diversity of vegetation that was lost, logistical factors such as accessibility of sites (influencing transportation costs), and the cost-effectiveness of the restoration techniques chosen. The review highlights six major research and adaptive management needs for advancing desert habitat restoration. These needs include: 1) continued development of innovative techniques and bet-hedging approaches to provide managers with “tool boxes” of candidate treatments to deploy in dynamic environmental and management conditions, 2) identifying how to optimize spatial deployment of limited restoration resources, 3) developing practical techniques for reducing non-native annual grasses across spatial scales, 4) improving linkages between habitat enhancements and short- and long-term indicators of tortoise usage and responses and Joshua tree population sustainability, 5) mitigating multiple, interacting stressors with cumulative impacts, and 6) integrating biotic (e.g., seeding) and abiotic (e.g., fencing, shade structures) treatments to complement each other at site and landscape scales in dynamic climates and environments. It is possible that bet-hedging approaches employing multiple treatment types (or phased treatments across years) and greater incorporation of abiotic treatments, which are less sensitive to timing of precipitation compared with biotic treatments, will become increasingly important under future climates projected to be drier and more variable. Existing research suggests that restoration can be deployed effectively even under adverse climatic conditions, but success requires identifying suitable techniques tailored to dynamic environments.

Arizona, California, Nevada, Sonora↗
USGS2014

Ecological risks of shale oil and gas development to wildlife, aquatic resources and their habitats

Technological advances in hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling have led to the exploration and exploitation of shale oil and gas both nationally and internationally. Extensive development of shale resources has occurred within the United States over the past decade, yet full build out is not expected to occur for years. Moreover, countries across the globe have large shale resources and are beginning to explore extraction of these resources. Extraction of shale resources is a multistep process that includes site identification, well pad and infrastructure development, well drilling, high-volume hydraulic fracturing and production; each with its own propensity to affect associated ecosystems. Some potential effects, for example from well pad, road and pipeline development, will likely be similar to other anthropogenic activities like conventional gas drilling, land clearing, exurban and agricultural development and surface mining (e.g., habitat fragmentation and sedimentation). Therefore, we can use the large body of literature available on the ecological effects of these activities to estimate potential effects from shale development on nearby ecosystems. However, other effects, such as accidental release of wastewaters, are novel to the shale gas extraction process making it harder to predict potential outcomes. Here, we review current knowledge of the effects of high-volume hydraulic fracturing coupled with horizontal drilling on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems in the contiguous United States, an area that includes 20 shale plays many of which have experienced extensive development over the past decade. We conclude that species and habitats most at risk are ones where there is an extensive overlap between a species range or habitat type and one of the shale plays (leading to high vulnerability) coupled with intrinsic characteristics such as limited range, small population size, specialized habitat requirements, and high sensitivity to disturbance. Examples include core forest habitat and forest specialists, sagebrush habitat and specialists, vernal pond inhabitants and stream biota. We suggest five general areas of research and monitoring that could aid in development of effective guidelines and policies to minimize negative impacts and protect vulnerable species and ecosystems: (1) spatial analyses, (2) species-based modeling, (3) vulnerability assessments, (4) ecoregional assessments, and (5) threshold and toxicity evaluations.

Environmental Science & Technology↗