Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Federation Proceedings”

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
USGS1999

U.S. Geological Survey Program on the South Florida Ecosystem; proceedings of South Florida Restoration Science Forum, May 17-19, 1999, Boca Raton, Florida

The purpose of the forum is to highlight the powerful connection between science and management decisions in restoration efforts. The public's investment in science is paying off in support of better management decisions and restoration of imperiled south Florida Ecosystems, including the internationally recognized, globally significant Everglades. The forum affords a unique opportunity for elected officials and other policy- and decision makers, along with the general public, to see--under one roof--highlights of the most significant restoration science and management efforts underway. The forum promotes the link between science and management. Scientists and decisionmakers will come together to discuss the needs of each in order to ensure that plans for restoration are based in science and are the most cost effective and highest quality possible. Continued vigilance over south Florida ecosystems is essential to prevent further harm and to restore them. Representatives from numerous federal, state, local, and nongovernmental entities are organizing the forum for the Science Coordination Team of the South Florida Ecosystem Working Group. The U.S. Geological Survey and the South Florida Water Management District are the primary hosts of the forum.

Florida↗
USGS2024

Annotated bibliography of scientific research relevant to oil and gas reclamation best management practices in the western United States, published from 1969 through 2020

Integrating recent scientific knowledge into management decisions supports effective natural resource management and can lead to better resource outcomes. However, finding and accessing scientific knowledge can be time consuming and costly. To assist in this process, the U.S. Geological Survey has created a series of annotated bibliographies on topics of management concern for lands in the western United States (U.S.). Oil and gas development on public lands is a long-standing and substantial component of local and regional economies and has expanded in recent decades, particularly on public lands in the western U.S. This development is associated with extensive networks of pipelines, roads, and processing facilities, across which reclamation is Federally mandated following initial well pad development (“interim” reclamation) and once resource extraction is complete (“final” reclamation). Reclamation is critical for recovering ecological services to energy-affected lands, including vegetation productivity, wildlife habitat, water and air quality, and soil stability (for example, resistance to wind and water erosion). However, reclamation of oil and gas affected lands in the western U.S. has proved challenging due to an array of regulatory and environmental factors, such as minimally developed soils, short growing seasons, herbivory, high winds, invasive species, rugged terrain, and in particular, arid climates associated with low total precipitation, high evapotranspiration rates, and highly variable precipitation patterns. We compiled and summarized journal articles, government reports, technical reports, proceedings, and theses and dissertations relevant to oil and gas reclamation. We constrained our search to products published on or before December 31, 2020 but did not limit our search by a starting date; the earliest product resulting from this effort was published in March 1969. Second, we manually scanned the last 15 years (2005-2020) of tables of contents in journals, bibliographies, and proceedings of which we were aware would contain articles highly relevant to this bibliography. We carried out the search for these products through multiple means: (1) performing a structured search of two reference databases, (2) examining articles published since 2005 in highly relevant scientific journals and conference proceedings, and (3) reviewing additional material suggested by authors of products identified in steps 1 and 2. Our search was intentionally broad in order to identify as much relevant work as possible, much of which is professionally applied and tested within the industry of oil and gas reclamation, but which remains unpublished in scientific journals. We refined the initial list of products by removing: (1) duplicates, (2) products not written in English, (3) products that were not relevant to the arid ecosystems of western North America, (4) products that were not released as research, data products, or review articles in journals or as formal scientific reports, and (5) products with data which were not relevant to reclamation of oil and gas-affected lands, or for which the study did not present new data, findings, or syntheses relevant to reclamation of oil and gas-affected lands. We summarized each product using a consistent structure (background, objectives, methods, location, findings, and implications) and assigned standardized management topics to each. Management topics are intended to aid online searching within the bibliography and are described in more detail in the Methods Section of this report; they include what type of disturbance the product addresses (well pads, mining, pipelines), what aspect of oil and gas reclamation they pertain to (practices, standards, monitoring), what type of data are present in the product (for instance soil or vegetation recovery data), and an indication if the product were from a source other than a published, peer-reviewed outlet (such as dissertations or unpublished professional reports – these are identified as grey literature). The review process for this annotated bibliography included an initial internal colleague review of each summary, requesting input on each summary from an author of the original product, and a formal peer-review. Our initial searches resulted in 3,197 total products, of which 290 met our criteria for inclusion. “Reclamation Practices” is by far the management topic most addressed, followed by “Reclamation Monitoring,” for example, products assessing what and how monitoring methods are used to track and measure reclamation outcome. This document may be accessed at https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20231068 or from the U.S. Geological Survey Publication Warehouse ( https://pubs.usgs.gov/ ). The 1-page product summaries herein will also be used to create a bibliography at https://apps.usgs.gov/science-for-resource-managers that includes links to each original product, where available, and in which subject matter will be searchable by topic, location, and year. The studies compiled and summarized here may inform planning and management actions that seek to reclaim landscapes across the western U.S. which have been affected by oil and gas development.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2006

Proceedings of the 4th New World Luminescence Dating and Dosimetry Workshop, Denver, Colorado, May 31 June 2, 2006

Introduction: Optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) is one of a class of measurements known as stimulated phenomena. Such phenomena may be stimulated thermally or optically and the reader is referred to works by Aitken (1998) and Botter-Jensen and others (2003) for more detail. In recent years OSL has become a popular procedure for the determination of environmental radiation doses absorbed by archeological and geological materials in an attempt to date these materials. The first OSL measurements on quartz and feldspar were made using an argon ion-laser (Huntley et al., 1985). However, the development of cheaper stimulation systems based first on filtered lamps and then on light- emitting diodes (LEDs) (Spooner, et al., 1990; Botter-Jensen, and others, 1999) has led to a massive expansion in OSL dating applications. The abstracts in this volume represent presentations from a workshop held in May-June 2006, at the Denver Federal Center, Denver, Colorado, in which OSL methodologies and applications were summarized and integrated to provide a current synthesis of the OSL science being applied throughout North America. The workshop, sponsored by the U.S. Geological Survey Crustal Imaging and Characterization Team and North Dakota State University, was open to all scientists interested in OSL dating techniques and radiation dosimetry. Participants included thirty-six research scientists and students in geology, archaeology, and physics from the U.S. Geological Survey, Los Alamos National Labs, Kentucky Geological Survey, eight universities in the United States, one university in Canada, one university in India, and Riso National Labs of Denmark. The workshop included two keynote speakers: Dr. Ashok Singhvi (Physical Research Laboratory, Ahmedabad, India) spoke on 'Some Unexplored Methodological Aspects and Some New Applications of Luminescence Dating,' while Dr. Jim Feathers (University of Seattle, WA) spoke on OSL Dating of Sediments From Paleoindian Sites in Brazil. The workshop encouraged everyone to interact more to develop a broader perspective on the types of research and the problems encountered when reporting OSL ages. This meeting follows the first North American Luminescence Dating Workshop held in Tulsa, OK, by Oklahoma State University (2001), in Albuquerque, NM, by Los Alamos National Labs (2002), and in Halifax, Nova Scotia, by Dalhousie University (2004, with a name change to New World Luminescence Dating Workshop). These workshops were interspersed with the international meetings on luminescence that were held in Reno, NV, (2002), and Cologne, Germany; (2005).

Open-File Report↗
USGS2013

Biogeographic perspective of speciation among desert tortoises in the genus Gopherus : a preliminary evaluation

The enduring processes of time, climate, and adaptation have sculpted the distribution of organisms we observe in the Sonoran Desert. One such organism is Morafka’s desert tortoise, Gopherus morafkai. We apply a genomic approach to identify the evolutionary processes driving diversity in this species and present preliminary findings and emerging hypotheses. The Sonoran Desert form of the tortoise exhibits a continuum of genetic similarity spanning 850 km of Sonoran desertscrub extending from Empalme, Sonora, to Kingman, Arizona. However, at the ecotone between desertscrub and foothills thornscrub we identify a distinct, Sinaloan lineage and this occurrence suggests a more complex evolutionary history for G. morafkai. By using multiple loci from throughout the tortoise’s genome, we aim to determine if divergence between these lineages occurred in allopatry, and further to investigate for signatures of past or current genetic introgression. This international, collaborative project will assist state and federal agencies in developing management strategies that best preserve the evolutionary potential of Morafka’s desert tortoise. Ultimately, an understanding of the evolutionary history of desert tortoises will not only clarify the forces that have driven the divergence in this group, but also contribute to our knowledge of the biogeographic history of the Southwestern deserts and how diversity is maintained within them.

Proceedings↗
USGS1994

Worldwide Assessment of the Status of Seismic Zonation, Fourth International Forum on Seismic Zonation, Proceedings

We are pleased to provide you with information developed for the Fourth International Forum on Seismic Zonation which will be convened in two locations year in conjunction two major international meetings. The objectives are: 1) to assess the status of seismic zonation in every country of the world, 2) to evaluate the reasons for advances and new initiatives, and 3) to foster continued cooperation. Seismic zonation is the process that leads to risk reduction and sustainability of new development. It is based on the division of a geographic region into smaller areas or zones on the basis of an integrated assessment of the hazard, built, and policy environments of the region. Seismic zonation depends on hazard mapping performed on national/regional, subregional, and urban (i.e., microzonation) scales depending on the particular application. We gratefully acknowledge the written communications of many professionals who responded to our request for information. Also, we acknowledge the use of information contained in five valuable reports (see directories in the Appendices for information on where to obtain copies of the reports): 1. United Nations, 1990, Cooperative Project for Seismic Risk Reduction in the Mediterranean Region (SEISMED), proceedings, Office of the United Nations Disaster Relief Coordinator, Geneva, Switzerland, 3 vols. (Franco Maranzana - Italy/Appendix D). 2. United States Geological Survey, 1992, The Worldwide Earthquake Risk Management (WWERM) Program, Reston, Virginia, 19 p (Paul Thenhaus or S.T. Algermissen - USA/ Appendix D). 3. Instituto Panamericano de Geografia Historia, 1992, Revista Geofisica, Lima, Peru, No. 37, July-December, 234 p (Alberto Giesecke- Peru/Appendix D). 4. Annali di Geofisica, 1992, Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program (GSHAP) (Special Issue), International Lithosphere Program, Publication 209, Bologna, Italy, 257 p (Domenico Giardini-Italy/Appendix F). 5. International Association of Seismology and Physics of the Earth's Interior and European Seismological Commission, 1993, The Practice of Hazard Assessment, Golden, Colorado, 284 p (Write Bob Engdahl, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver Federal Center, Mail Stop 967, Denver, Colorado 80225, USA).

Open-File Report↗
USGS2002

Landscape ecology of plague in the American southwest, September 19-20, 2000, Fort Collins, Colorado

During September 19-20, 2000, a workshop titled "Landscape Ecology of Plague in the American Southwest" was held in Fort Collins, Colorado. The workshop was funded by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)-Earth Surface Processes Team and sponsored by the USGS National Wildlife Health Center. Forty scientists and natural resource managers and administrators representing 8 federal agencies, 4 state agencies, 6 universities, and other local agencies and nongovernment organizations met to discuss historical and current status of plague in the United States, current activities in plague surveillance, research, and management in wildlife, and research and information needs relative to plague control and management. Eleven individual presentations on plague history, status, and trends; diagnostic technologies; epizootiological studies and observations; and control and management strategies and studies, followed by a panel discussion on the impact of plague on wildlife and ecosystems, led the way to extensive group discussions on important plague-related questions, issues and problems. Workshop attendees participated in identifying important research and information needs relevant to control and management of plague in wildlife, and in the process, established new cooperative and collaborative partnerships and enhanced existing relationships upon which future research and information needs can be met. The proceedings from this workshop are intended to be used by the natural resource managers and researchers from the various participating agencies, research facilities, as well as other stakeholders to aid in the development of future research and information programs and funding initiatives related to both zoonotic and sylvatic plague.

American Southwest↗
USGS1989

Acid rain publications by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1979-1989

Pollution of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems has been a concern to society since the burning of fossil fuels began in the industrial revolution. In the past decade or so, this concern has been heightened by evidence that chemical transformation in the atmosphere of combustion by-products and subsequent long-range transport can cause environmental damage in remote areas. The extent of this damage and the rates of ecological recovery were largely unknown. "Acid rain" became the environmental issue of the 1980's. To address the increasing concerns of the public, in 1980 the Federal government initiated a 10-year interagency research program to develop information that could be used by the President and the Congress in making decisions for emission controls. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been an active participant in acid precipitation research. The Service provided support to a number of scientific conferences and forums, including the Action Seminar on Acid Precipitation held in Toronto, Canada, in 1979, an international symposium on Acidic Precipitation and Fishery Impacts in Northeastern North America in 1981, and a symposium on Acidic Precipitation and Atmospheric Deposition: A Western Perspective in 1982. These meetings as well as the growing involvement with the government's National Acidic Precipitation Assessment Program placed the Service in the lead in research on the biological effects of acidic deposition. Research projects have encompassed water chemistry, aquatic invertebrates, amphibians, fish, and waterfowl. Water quality surveys have been conducted to help determine the extent of acid precipitation effects in the northeast, Middle Atlantic, and Rocky Mountain regions. In addition to lake and stream studies, research in wetland and some terrestrial habitats has also been conducted. Specific projects have addressed important sport species such as brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis), Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar), and striped bass (Morone saxatilis). Trace metal accumulation in fish has been investigated and a symposium sponsored on related work. U.S> Fish and Wildlife Service scientists serve as advisors and participants in research being conducted by industry, nonprofit groups, State and other Federal agencies. Researcher have worked closely with colleagues in Canada, England, Norway, Scotland, the Soviet Union, and Sweden to gain additional understanding of the problem. In 1982, the Service implemented a mitigation research program to provide resource managers with information to help them protect sensitive ecosystems, and rehabilitation methods for resources already affected by acidification. An international workshop was convened to outline the research needs. Several conferences were organized to develop appropriate field and laboratory procedures. Scientists with the mitigation research program are evaluating the ecological effects of liming (addition of base material) surface waters and surrounding watershed to provide buffering against acidic inputs. Through long-term cooperative project with States and other organizations, investigations are studying possible abatement methods for regions most affected by acidic deposition. To date, more than 200 reports the describe these studies have been published. These products include conference proceedings, journal articles, and in-house scientific publications. An education poster describing the effects of acid rain on aquatic ecosystems was developed and distributed to individuals, conservations and State organizations, and the public education system. This annotated bibliography lists current publications by Service authors, cooperators, or contractors on acid rain and related quality. Entire are arranged alphabetically by author surname. For further information about the research program, contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Acid Precipitation Section, National Fishery Research Center -- Leetown, Box 700, Kearneysville, WV 25430.

Biological Report↗
USGS2014

Birds of a feather

Greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasiunus , hereafter sage-grouse) are broadly distributed, occupy a diversity of sagebrush habitats, and face multiple threats. As a result of these threats, sage-grouse populations are declining and are now absent from almost one-half of their estimated range prior to Euro-American settlement. The risks to sage-grouse are significant enough to merit candidate status for this species for listing under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (Federal Register Notice, March 5, 2010). According to this decision by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 2010, population and habitat fragmentation coupled with lack of regulatory mechanisms warranted listing, although implementation of actions has been precluded by other priorities. Candidate status for listing under the Endangered Species Act and possible regulatory action in the near future provide strong motivation to better understand the dynamics of sage-grouse populations and their habitat requirements. The general approach currently taken by managers focuses on maintaining or enhancing sage-grouse populations across their distribution in regions containing the highest densities of breeding birds and their important seasonal habitats, also known as priority areas for conservation (PACs). The rationale behind this approach is that it permits limited resources to be applied in regions that have the greatest potential to benefit the largest proportion of sage-grouse. Development and other forms of land use can then proceed under standard regulations in areas outside PACs. Implementation of this approach requires detailed information about habitat, connections among sage-grouse populations, and approaches to restore and maintain sagebrush. These are important topics of study by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and its research partners.

California;Idaho;Nevada;Oregon;Utah;Washington↗
USGS2013

Partnering for science: proceedings of the USGS Workshop on Citizen Science

What U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) programs use citizen science? How can projects be best designed while meeting policy requirements? What are the most effective volunteer recruitment methods? What data should be collected to ensure validation and how should data be stored? What standard protocols are most easily used by volunteers? Can data from multiple projects be integrated to support new research or existing science questions? To help answer these and other questions, the USGS Community of Data Integration (CDI) supported the development of the Citizen Science Working Group (CSWG) in August 2011 and funded the working group’s proposal to hold a USGS Citizen Science Workshop in fiscal year 2012. The stated goals for our workshop were: raise awareness of programs and projects in the USGS that incorporate citizen science, create a community of practice for the sharing of knowledge and experiences, provide a forum to discuss the challenges of—and opportunities for—incorporating citizen science into USGS projects, and educate and support scientists and managers whose projects may benefit from public participation in science.To meet these goals, the workshop brought together 50 attendees (see appendix A for participant details) representing the USGS, partners, and external citizen science practitioners from diverse backgrounds (including scientists, managers, project coordinators, and technical developers, for example) to discuss these topics at the Denver Federal Center in Colorado on September 11–12, 2012. Over two and a half days, attendees participated in four major plenary sessions (Citizen Science Policy and Challenges, Engaging the Public in Scientific Research, Data Collection and Management, and Technology and Tools) comprised of 25 invited presentations and followed by structured discussions for each session designed to address both prepared and ad hoc "big questions." A number of important community support and infrastructure needs were identified from the sessions and discussions, and a subteam was formed to draft a strategic vision statement to guide and prioritize future USGS efforts to support the citizen science community. Attendees also brainstormed proposal ideas for the fiscal year 2013 CDI request for proposals: one possible venue to support the execution of the vision.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1975

Mineral resource management of the Outer Continental Shelf : leasing procedures, evaluation of resources, and supervision of production operations on leased lands of the Outer Continental Shelf

An important function of the Geological Survey is the evaluation and management of the mineral resources of the Outer Continental Shelf, particularly with respect to oil and gas, salt, and sulfur. Production of oil and gas from the Outer Continental Shelf of the United States has increased substantially over the past 20 years and represents an increasing percentage of total United States production. As discovery of major onshore production of oil and gas has become more difficult, the search has moved into the surrounding waters where submerged sedimentary formations are conducive to the accumulation of oil and gas. Increased energy demands of recent years have accelerated the pace of offshore operations with a corresponding improvement in technology as exploration and development have proceeded farther from shore and into deeper water. While improved technology and enforcement of more stringent regulations have made offshore operations safer, it is unrealistic to believe that completely accident-free operations can ever be achieved. Only slightly more than six percent of the world's continental terrace is adjacent to the United States, but less than one percent has been explored for oil and gas. Since the lead time for the development of offshore oil and gas resources can be as much as a decade, they do not provide an immediate energy supply but should be viewed in the light of a near-term source with a potential of becoming a medium-range source of supply pending the development of alternative energy sources. Revenues from the Outer Continental Shelf are deposited to the general fund of the United States Treasury. A major portion of these funds is allocated to the Land and Water Conservation Fund, the largest Federal grant-in-aid program of assistance to States, counties, and cities for the acquisition and development of public parks, open space, and recreation lands and water.

Circular↗
USGS1967

Hydrologic and climatologic data, 1966, Salt Lake County, Utah

An investigation of the water resources of Salt Lake County, Utah, was undertaken by the Water Resources Division of the U.S. Geological Survey in July 1963. This investigation is a cooperative project financed equally by the State of Utah and the Federal Government in accordance with an agreement between the State Engineer and the Geological Survey. The Utah Water and Power Board, Utah Fish and Game Commission, Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District, Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Kennecott Copper Corporation, Utah Power and Light Company, Salt Lake City Chamber of Commerce, and the Central Utah Water Conservancy District contributed funds to the State Engineer's office toward support of the project. The investigation encompasses the collection and interpretation of a large variety of climatologic, hydrologic, and geologic data in and near Salt Lake County. Utah Basic-Data Releases 11 and 12 contain data collected through 1965. This release contains climatologic and surface-water data for the 1966 water year (October 1965 to September 1966) and groundwater data collected during the 1966 calendar year. Similar annual releases will contain data collected during the remainder of the investigation, and interpretive reports will be prepared as the investigation proceeds. Organizations that furnished data are acknowledged in station descriptions and footnotes to tables.

Utah↗
USGS1966

Hydrologic and climatologic data, 1965, Salt Lake County, Utah

An investigation of the water resources of Salt Lake County, Utah, was undertaken by the Water Resources Division of the U.S. Geological Survey in July 1963. This investigation is a cooperative project financed equally by the State of Utah and the Federal Government in accordance with an agreement between the State Engineer and the Geological Survey. The Utah Water and Power Board, Utah Fish and Game Commission, Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District, Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Kennecott Copper Corporation, Utah Power and Light Company, Salt Lake City Chamber of Commerce, and the Central Utah Water Conservancy District. contributed funds to the State Engineer's office toward support of the project. The investigation encompasses the collection and interpretation of a large variety of climatologic, hydrologic, and geologic data in and near Salt Lake County. Utah Basic-Data Release No. 11 contains data collected through 1964. This release contains climatologic and surface-water data for the 1965 water year (October 1964 to September 1965) and ground-water data collected during the 1965 calendar year. Similar annual releases will contain data collected during the remainder of the investigation, and interpretive reports will be prepared as the investigation proceeds. Organizations that furnished data are acknowledged in station descriptions and footnotes to tables.

Utah↗
USGS2004

Digital mapping techniques '04, workshop proceedings : May 16-19, 2004, Portland, Oregon

The Digital Mapping Techniques ‘04 (DMT’04) workshop was attended by about 100 technical experts from 40 agencies, universities, and private companies, including representatives from 22 state geological surveys (see Appendix A). This workshop was similar in nature to the previous seven meetings, held in Lawrence, Kansas (Soller, 1997), in Champaign, Illinois (Soller, 1998), in Madison, Wisconsin (Soller, 1999), in Lexington, Kentucky (Soller, 2000), in Tuscaloosa, Alabama (Soller, 2001), in Salt Lake City, Utah (Soller, 2002), and in Millersville, Pennsylvania (Soller, 2003). This year’s meeting was hosted by the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, from May 16–19, 2004, on the Portland State University campus in Portland, Oregon. As in the previous meetings, the objective was to foster informal discussion and exchange of technical information. This objective was well met, as attendees continued to share and exchange knowledge and information, and to renew friendships and collegial work begun at past DMT workshops. All the DMT workshops have been coordinated by the Association of American State Geologists (AASG) and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Data Capture Working Group, which was formed in August 1996, to support the AASG and the USGS in their effort to build a National Geologic Map Database (see Soller, Berg, and Stamm, this volume, and http://ngmdb.usgs.gov/info/standards/datacapt/ ). The Working Group was formed because increased production efficiencies, standardization, and quality of digital map products were needed for the National database—and for the State and Federal geological surveys—to provide more high-quality digital maps to the public. At the 2004 meeting, oral and poster presentations and special discussion sessions emphasized: 1) methods for creating and publishing map products (here, “publishing” includes Web-based release); 2) field data capture software and techniques; 3) digital cartographic techniques; 4) migration of digital maps into ArcGIS Geodatabase format; 5) analytical GIS techniques; 6) continued development of the National Geologic Map Database; and 7) progress toward building and implementing a standard geologic map data model and standard science language for the U.S. and for North America.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2003

Digital mapping techniques '03 - Workshop proceedings

The Digital Mapping Techniques '03 (DMT'03) workshop was attended by nearly 90 technical experts from 36 agencies, universities, and private companies, including representatives from 22 state geological surveys (see Appendix A). Although the meeting was slightly smaller than DMT'02 it was, considering the budget deficits in nearly all 50 states, very well attended. This workshop was similar in nature to the previous six meetings, held in Lawrence, Kansas (Soller, 1997), in Champaign, Illinois (Soller, 1998), in Madison, Wisconsin (Soller, 1999), in Lexington, Kentucky (Soller, 2000), in Tuscaloosa, Alabama (Soller, 2001), and in Salt Lake City, Utah (Soller, 2002). This year's meeting was hosted by the Pennsylvania Geological Survey, from June 1-4, 2003, on the Millersville University campus in Millersville, Pennsylvania. As in the previous meetings, the objective was to foster informal discussion and exchange of technical information. This objective was well met, as attendees continued to share and exchange knowledge and information, and to renew friendships and collegial work begun at past DMT workshops. All the DMT workshops have been coordinated by the Association of American State Geologists (AASG) and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Data Capture Working Group, which was formed in August 1996, to support the AASG and the USGS in their effort to build a National Geologic Map Database (see Soller and Berg, this volume, and <http://ncgmp.usgs.gov/ngmdbproject/ standards/datacapt/>). The Working Group was formed because increased production efficiencies, standardization, and quality of digital map products were needed for the database— and the State and Federal geological surveys—to provide more high-quality digital maps to the public. At the 2003 meeting, oral and poster presentations and special discussion sessions emphasized 1) methods for creating and publishing map products (here, "publishing" includes Web-based release); 2) digital cartographic techniques, 3) analytical GIS techniques; 4) continued development of the National Geologic Map Database; 5) progress toward building and implementing a standard geologic map data model and standard science language, and 6) the need to archive both the published products and the data and observational data that support it.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2005

Digital Mapping Techniques '05--Workshop Proceedings, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, April 24-27, 2005

Introduction: The Digital Mapping Techniques '05 (DMT'05) workshop was attended by more than 100 technical experts from 47 agencies, universities, and private companies, including representatives from 25 state geological surveys (see Appendix A). This workshop was similar in nature to the previous eight meetings, held in Lawrence, Kansas (Soller, 1997), in Champaign, Illinois (Soller, 1998), in Madison, Wisconsin (Soller, 1999), in Lexington, Kentucky (Soller, 2000), in Tuscaloosa, Alabama (Soller, 2001), in Salt Lake City, Utah (Soller, 2002), in Millersville, Pennsylvania (Soller, 2003), and in Portland, Oregon (Soller, 2004). This year's meeting was hosted by the Louisiana Geological Survey, from April 24-27, 2005, on the Louisiana State University campus in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. As in the previous meetings, the objective was to foster informal discussion and exchange of technical information. It is with great pleasure I note that the objective was successfully met, as attendees continued to share and exchange knowledge and information, and to renew friendships and collegial work begun at past DMT workshops. Each DMT workshop has been coordinated by the Association of American State Geologists (AASG) and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Data Capture Working Group, which was formed in August 1996, to support the AASG and the USGS in their effort to build a National Geologic Map Database (see Soller and Berg, this volume, and http://ngmdb.usgs.gov/info/standards/datacapt/). The Working Group was formed because increased production efficiencies, standardization, and quality of digital map products were needed for the database?and for the State and Federal geological surveys?to provide more high-quality digital maps to the public. At the 2005 meeting, oral and poster presentations and special discussion sessions emphasized: 1) methods for creating and publishing map products (here, 'publishing' includes Web-based release); 2) field data capture software and techniques, including the use of LIDAR; 3) digital cartographic techniques; 4) migration of digital maps into ArcGIS Geodatabase format; 5) analytical GIS techniques; 6) continued development of the National Geologic Map Database; and 7) progress toward building and implementing a standard geologic map data model and standard science language for the U.S. and for North America.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2002

Digital mapping techniques '02, workshop proceedings : May 19-22, 2002, Salt Lake City, Utah

The Digital Mapping Techniques '02 (DMT'02) workshop was attended by 101 technical experts from 43 agencies, universities, and private companies, including representatives from 25 state geological surveys (see Appendix A). This workshop was similar in nature to the previous five meetings, held in Lawrence, Kansas (Soller, 1997), in Champaign, Illinois (Soller, 1998a), in Madison, Wisconsin (Soller, 1999), in Lexington, Kentucky (Soller, 2000), and in Tuscaloosa, Alabama (Soller, 2001). This year's meeting was hosted by the Utah Geological Survey, from May 19 to 22, 2002, on the University of Utah campus in Salt Lake City. As in the previous meetings, the objective was to foster informal discussion and exchange of technical information. When an attendee adopts or modifies a newly learned technique on the basis of discussions at the workshop, the workshop clearly has met that objective. Evidence of learning and cooperation among participating agencies continued to be a highlight of the DMT workshops (see example in Soller, 1998b, and various papers in this volume). All the DMT workshops have been coordinated by the Association of American State Geologists (AASG) and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Data Capture Working Group, which was formed in August 1996 to support the AASG and the USGS in their effort to build a National Geologic Map Database (see Soller and Berg, this volume, and http://ncgmp.usgs.gov/ngmdbproject/standards/datacapt/ ). The Working Group was formed because increased production efficiencies, standardization, and quality of digital map products were needed for the database--and the State and Federal geological surveys--to provide more high-quality digital maps to the public. At the 2002 meeting, oral and poster presentations and special discussion sessions emphasized (1) methods for creating and publishing map products (here, "publishing" includes Web-based release); (2) techniques for scanning already published maps and managing and delivering them on the Web; (3) continued development of the National Geologic Map Database; and (4) progress toward building a standard geologic map data model. In addition, special presentations were provided on building a statewide GIS council, incorporating geology as a NSDI Framework layer, and resolving the roles of surveyors and GIS professionals.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2013

Abstracts for the October 2012 meeting on volcanism in the American Southwest, Flagstaff, Arizona

Though volcanic eruptions are comparatively rare in the American Southwest, the States of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, and Utah host Holocene volcanic eruption deposits and are vulnerable to future volcanic activity. Compared with other parts of the western United States, comparatively little research has been focused on this area, and eruption probabilities are poorly constrained. Monitoring infrastructure consists of a variety of local seismic networks, and ”backbone“ geodetic networks with little integration. Emergency response planning for volcanic unrest has received little attention by either Federal or State agencies. On October 18–20, 2012, 90 people met at the U.S. Geological Survey campus in Flagstaff, Arizona, providing an opportunity for volcanologists, land managers, and emergency responders to meet, converse, and begin to plan protocols for any future activity. Geologists contributed data on recent findings of eruptive ages, eruption probabilities, and hazards extents (plume heights, ash dispersal). Geophysicists discussed evidence for magma intrusions from seismic, geodetic, and other geophysical techniques. Network operators publicized their recent work and the relevance of their equipment to volcanic regions. Land managers and emergency responders shared their experiences with emergency planning for earthquakes. The meeting was organized out of the recognition that little attention had been paid to planning for or mitigation of volcanic hazards in the American Southwest. Moreover, few geological meetings have hosted a session specifically devoted to this topic. This volume represents one official outcome of the meeting—a collection of abstracts related to talks and poster presentations shared during the first two days of the meeting. In addition, this report includes the meeting agenda as a record of the proceedings. One additional intended outcome will be greater discussion and coordination among emergency responders, geologists, geophysicists, and land managers regarding geologic hazards in the Southwest.

Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah↗
USGS1968

Hydrologic and climatologic data, 1967, Salt Lake County, Utah

An investigation of the water resources of Salt Lake County, Utah, was undertaken by the Water Resources Division of the U.S. Geological Survey in July 1963. This investigation is a cooperative project financed chiefly by equal contributions of the State of Utah and the Federal Government in accordance with an agreement between the Division of Water Rights, Utah Department of Natural Resources, and the Geological Survey. The investigation was financed during the period covered by this report by the following organizations: Utah Division of Water Rights (formerly State Engineer), Utah Division of Water Resources (formerly Water and Power Board), Salt Lake County, Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District, Central Utah Water Conservancy District, Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City, City of Murray, Granger-Hunter Improvement District, Taylorsville-Bennion Improvement District, Holladay Water Company, Magna Water and Sewer District, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Geological Survey. The investigation encompasses the collection and interpretation of a large variety of climatologic, hydrologic, and geologic data in and near Salt Lake County. Utah Basic-Data Releases 11-13 contain data collected through 1966. This release contains climatologic and surfacewater data for the 1967 water year (October 1966 to September 1967) and ground-water data collected during the 1967 calendar year. A similar annual release will contain data collected during the remainder of the investigation, and interpretive reports will be prepared as the investigation proceeds. Organizations that furnished data are acknowledged in station descriptions and footnotes to tables.

Utah↗