SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Natural Resource Technical Report”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 73 records · Page 4Linked to original sources

USGS2005

Geospatial decision support systems for societal decision making

While science provides reliable information to describe and understand the earth and its natural processes, it can contribute more. There are many important societal issues in which scientific information can play a critical role. Science can add greatly to policy and management decisions to minimize loss of life and property from natural and man-made disasters, to manage water, biological, energy, and mineral resources, and in general, to enhance and protect our quality of life. However, the link between science and decision-making is often complicated and imperfect. Technical language and methods surround scientific research and the dissemination of its results. Scientific investigations often are conducted under different conditions, with different spatial boundaries, and in different timeframes than those needed to support specific policy and societal decisions. Uncertainty is not uniformly reported in scientific investigations. If society does not know that data exist, what the data mean, where to use the data, or how to include uncertainty when a decision has to be made, then science gets left out -or misused- in a decision making process. This paper is about using Geospatial Decision Support Systems (GDSS) for quantitative policy analysis. Integrated natural -social science methods and tools in a Geographic Information System that respond to decision-making needs can be used to close the gap between science and society. The GDSS has been developed so that nonscientists can pose "what if" scenarios to evaluate hypothetical outcomes of policy and management choices. In this approach decision makers can evaluate the financial and geographic distribution of potential policy options and their societal implications. Actions, based on scientific information, can be taken to mitigate hazards, protect our air and water quality, preserve the planet's biodiversity, promote balanced land use planning, and judiciously exploit natural resources. Applications using the GDSS have demonstrated the benefits of utilizing science for policy decisions. Investment in science reduces decision-making uncertainty and reducing that uncertainty has economic value.

Boletin Geologico y Minero↗

USGS2014

Strategic conservation planning for the Eastern North Carolina/Southeastern Virginia Strategic Habitat Conservation Team

The Eastern North Carolina/Southeastern Virginia Strategic Habitat Conservation Team (ENCSEVA) is a partnership among local federal agencies and programs with a mission to apply Strategic Habitat Conservation to accomplish priority landscape-level conservation within its geographic region. ENCSEVA seeks to further landscape-scale conservation through collaboration with local partners. To accomplish this mission, ENCSEVA is developing a comprehensive Strategic Habitat Conservation Plan (Plan) to provide guidance for its members, partners, and collaborators by establishing mutual conservation goals, objectives, strategies, and metrics to gauge the success of conservation efforts. Identifying common goals allows the ENCSEVA team to develop strategies that leverage joint resources and are more likely to achieve desired impacts across the landscape. The Plan will also provide an approach for ENCSEVA to meet applied research needs (identify knowledge gaps), foster adaptive management principles, identify conservation priorities, prioritize threats (including potential impacts of climate change), and identify the required capacity to implement strategies to create more resilient landscapes. ENCSEVA seeks to support the overarching goals of the South Atlantic Landscape Conservation Cooperative (SALCC) and to provide scientific and technical support for conservation at landscape scales as well as inform the management of natural resources in response to shifts in climate, habitat fragmentation and loss, and other landscape-level challenges (South Atlantic LCC 2012). The ENCSEVA ecoregion encompasses the northern third of the SALCC geography and offers a unique opportunity to apply landscape conservation at multiple scales through the guidance of local conservation and natural resource management efforts and by reporting metrics that reflect the effectiveness of those efforts (Figure 1). The Environmental Decision Analysis Team, housed within the North Carolina Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit at North Carolina State University, is assisting the ENCSEVA team in developing a scientifically sound basis for the Plan though the elicitation of expert knowledge and the organization of that knowledge using the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation. The Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation is a framework that is well suited to incorporating decision-making tools such as Structured Decision Making and provides a multi-step process to conceptually organize conservation projects in a manner that enhances the rigor and transparency of expert and knowledge-based plans. It helps define explicit pathways from 2 planned conservation activities and ultimate impact, as well as indicators to measure success (Stem et al. 2005). Specifically, the framework identifies conservation targets, key ecological attributes, threats, and associated indicators to monitor responses given the implementation of a conservation action (Conservation Measures Partnership 2007). This report serves to provide a scientific foundation for the Plan by summarizing the expert opinion of wildlife biologists, ecologists, hydrologists, researchers, natural resource managers, and conservation practitioners regarding five environments (wetlands, riverine systems, estuaries, uplands, and barrier islands) within the ENCSEVA geography. Specifically, this report describes (1) the approach to elicit expert knowledge meant to support the strategic plan, (2) how this knowledge can inform collaborative conservation planning, and (3) a summary of opportunities available for the ENCSEVA team to address threats and impacts associated with climate change within the ecoregion.

Technical Bulletin↗

USGS2017

Geology and Assessment of Undiscovered Oil and Gas Resources of the East Barents Basins Province and the Novaya Zemlya Basins and Admiralty Arch Province, 2008

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) recently assessed the potential for undiscovered petroleum resources of the East Barents Basins Province and the Novaya Zemlya Basins and Admiralty Arch Province as part of its Circum-Arctic Resource Appraisal. These two provinces are situated northeast of Scandinavia and the northwestern Russian Federation, on the Barents Sea Shelf between Novaya Zemlya to the east and the Barents Platform to the west. Three assessment units (AUs) were defined in the East Barents Basins Province for this study: the Kolguyev Terrace AU, the South Barents and Ludlov Saddle AU, and the North Barents Basin AU. A fourth AU, defined as the Novaya Zemlya Basins and Admiralty Arch AU, coincides with the Novaya Zemlya Basins and Admiralty Arch Province. These four AUs, all lying north of the Arctic Circle, were assessed for undiscovered, technically recoverable resources, resulting in total estimated mean volumes of ~7.4 billion barrels of crude oil, 318 trillion cubic feet (TCF) of natural gas, and 1.4 billion barrels of natural-gas liquids.

Professional Paper↗

USGS1969

Hydrologic reconnaissance of Deep Creek valley, Tooele and Juab Counties, Utah and Elko and White Pine Counties, Nevada

This report, the fourth in a series by the U. S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Rights, describes water resources of the western basins of Utah. Its purpose is to present available hydrologic data on Deep Creek valley, to provide an evaluation of the potential water-resource development of the valley, and to identify needed studies that would help provide an understanding of the valley's water supply.

Nevada, Utah↗

USGS1972

Hydrologic reconnaissance of the Promontory Mountains area Box Elder County, Utah

This report is the eleventh in a series by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Rights, which describes the water resources of the western basins of Utah (fig. 1). Its purpose is to present hydrologic data for the Promontory Mountains area, to provide an evaluation of the potential water-resource development of the area, and to identify needed studies that would improve understanding of the area's water supply.

Utah↗

USGS1974

Hydrologic reconnaissance of the northern Great Salt Lake Desert and summary hydrologic reconnaissance of northwestern Utah

This report is the thirteenth in a series prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Rights, that describes the water resources of selected basins in western Utah. The purpose of this series of reconnaissances is to analyze available hydrologic data, to evaluate present and potential water-resource development, and to identify additional studies that might be needed in the future to provide a fuller understanding of the hydrologic system.

Utah↗

USGS1968

Hydrologic reconnaissance of Skull Valley, Tooele County, Utah

This report is the second in a series by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Rights, which describes the water resources of the western basins of Utah. Its purpose is to present available hydrologic data on Skull Valley, to provide an evaluation of the potential water-resource development of the valley, and to identify needed studies that would help provide an understanding of the valley's water supply.

Utah↗

USGS1970

Hydrologic reconnaissance of Grouse Creek valley, Box Elder County, Utah

This report is the seventh in a series by the U. S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Rights, which describes water resources of the western basins of Utah. Its purpose is to present available hydrologic data on Grouse Creek valley, to provide an evaluation of the potential water-resource development of the valley, and to identify studies that would help provide a better understanding of the valley's water supply

Utah↗

USGS1971

Hydrologic reconnaissance of the Park Valley area, Box Elder County, Utah

This report is the eighth in a series prepared by the U. S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Rights, that describes the water resources of the western basins of Utah. (See fig. 1.) Its purpose is to present available hydrologic data on the Park Valley area, to provide an evaluation of the potential water-resource development of the area, and to identify needed studies that would improve understanding of the area's water supply.

Utah↗

USGS1969

Hydrologic reconnaissance of Rush Valley, Tooele County, Utah

This report is the third in a series by the U. S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Rights, which describes the water resources of the western basins of Utah. Its purpose is to present available hydrologic data for Rush Valley, to provide an evaluation of the potential water-resources development of the valley, and to identify needed studies that would help provide an understanding of the valley's water supply.

Utah↗

USGS2025

U.S. Geological Survey research and assessments supporting carbon dioxide removal

Both carbon capture and storage (CCS) and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) are methods to limit future global temperature rise and ocean acidification. CCS sequesters (stores) carbon dioxide (CO2) captured from industrial sources thereby preventing the CO2 from reaching the atmosphere. The captured CO2 is injected into underground geologic reservoirs or is converted into stable industrial products. CDR enhances natural processes or uses technical approaches to remove excess CO2 from the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is sequestered in natural sinks such as vegetation and soil, or injected into underground reservoirs or converted into durable products. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducts research and resource assessments that support biologic and geologic CDR approaches. This report will review some of the ongoing USGS CDR research and assessment efforts.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2012

Nature's Notebook 2011: Data & participant summary

Introduction The USA National Phenology Network The USA National Phenology Network (USA‐NPN; www.usanpn.org) seeks to engage a diverse range of citizen scientist volunteers, federal, state, and non‐governmental organizations, educators and professional research scientists to collect phenological observations of plants and animals using consistent standards and to contribute their observations to a national data repository. To guide this effort, the USA‐NPN National Coordinating Office (NCO), based in Tucson, Arizona, implemented an online monitoring program for plants and animals, Nature's Notebook , and has developed phenology monitoring protocols and an information management system, which includes the National Phenology Database (NPDb). We are developing a diversity of materials, tools, techniques, and protocols to assist decision making and education related to ecology, wildlife, human health, ecosystem services, natural resource management, biological conservation, and climate change adaptation.

USA-NPN Technical Series↗

USGS2017

Geologic assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources—Lower Cretaceous Albian to Upper Cretaceous Cenomanian carbonate rocks of the Fredericksburg and Washita Groups, United States Gulf of Mexico Coastal Plain and State Waters

In 2010, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) assessed Lower Cretaceous Albian to Upper Cretaceous Cenomanian carbonate rocks of the Fredericksburg and Washita Groups and their equivalent units for technically recoverable, undiscovered hydrocarbon resources underlying onshore lands and State Waters of the Gulf Coast region of the United States. This assessment was based on a geologic model that incorporates the Upper Jurassic-Cretaceous-Tertiary Composite Total Petroleum System (TPS) of the Gulf of Mexico basin; the TPS was defined previously by the USGS assessment team in the assessment of undiscovered hydrocarbon resources in Tertiary strata of the Gulf Coast region in 2007. One conventional assessment unit (AU), which extends from south Texas to the Florida panhandle, was defined: the Fredericksburg-Buda Carbonate Platform-Reef Gas and Oil AU. The assessed stratigraphic interval includes the Edwards Limestone of the Fredericksburg Group and the Georgetown and Buda Limestones of the Washita Group. The following factors were evaluated to define the AU and estimate oil and gas resources: potential source rocks, hydrocarbon migration, reservoir porosity and permeability, traps and seals, structural features, paleoenvironments (back-reef lagoon, reef, and fore-reef environments), and the potential for water washing of hydrocarbons near outcrop areas. In Texas and Louisiana, the downdip boundary of the AU was defined as a line that extends 10 miles downdip of the Lower Cretaceous shelf margin to include potential reef-talus hydrocarbon reservoirs. In Mississippi, Alabama, and the panhandle area of Florida, where the Lower Cretaceous shelf margin extends offshore, the downdip boundary was defined by the offshore boundary of State Waters. Updip boundaries of the AU were drawn based on the updip extent of carbonate rocks within the assessed interval, the presence of basin-margin fault zones, and the presence of producing wells. Other factors evaluated were the middle Cenomanian sea-level fall and erosion that removed large portions of platform and platform-margin carbonate sediments in the Washita Group of central Louisiana. The production history of discovered reservoirs and well data within the AU were examined to estimate the number and size of undiscovered oil and gas reservoirs within the AU. Using the USGS National Oil and Gas Assessment resource assessment methodology, mean volumes of 40 million barrels of oil, 622 billion cubic feet of gas, and 14 million barrels of natural gas liquids are the estimated technically recoverable undiscovered resources for the Fredericksburg-Buda Carbonate Platform-Reef Gas and Oil AU.

Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi↗

USGS1974

Water resources of the Milford area, Utah, with emphasis on ground water

The investigation of the water resources of the Milford area was made as part of a cooperative program with the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Rights, to investigate the water resources of the State. The primary purpose of this report is to provide basic hydrologic information needed for the effective administration and adjudication of water rights in the valley.

Utah↗

USGS2026

USGS Geochron—A database of geochronological and thermochronological dates and data—Technical documentation

Geochronological and thermochronological data are essential for constraining the timing and rates of geological processes, supporting geologic mapping, natural hazard assessment, and resource exploration. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Geochron Database is a centralized, relational database that integrates USGS and State geological survey data in accordance with the National Geologic Mapping Act of 1992 and its reauthorizations. This report documents the structure and development of the database, including its standardized schema, controlled vocabularies, and protocols for compiling legacy and newly published data. The database is designed to adhere to FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) data principles and currently (2026) includes data from a wide range of geochronological and thermochronological methods. Public access is provided through the USGS Geochron Database Explorer, a browser-based geographic information system (GIS) interface, and through versioned data releases available on ScienceBase, which provide sample-level summary data and detailed analytical information. The USGS Geochron Database is structured to be extensible, supporting the inclusion of additional methods and data types as they are compiled. This format ensures long-term utility and aligns with the Mapping Act’s directive to create a national archive of geochronological information that adds interpretive value to geologic map data. Its design reflects a commitment to data transparency, scientific reproducibility, and national geoscience priorities.

Data Report↗

USGS1971

Water resources of Salt Lake County, Utah

Utah↗

USGS1970

Water resources of the Heber-Kamas-Park City area north-central Utah, with a section on a gravity and aeromagnetic survey of Heber and Rhodes Valleys

This report on the water resources of the Heber-Kamas-Park City area was prepared by the U. S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Rights. The primary purpose of the report is to provide the Division of Water Rights with the basic hydrologic information needed for the effective administration of water rights in the area.

Utah↗

USGS2012

Assessment of potential additions to conventional oil and gas resources of the world (outside the United States) from reserve growth, 2012

The U.S. Geological Survey estimated volumes of technically recoverable, conventional petroleum resources resulting from reserve growth for discovered fields outside the United States that have reported in-place oil and gas volumes of 500 million barrels of oil equivalent or greater. The mean volumes were estimated at 665 billion barrels of crude oil, 1,429 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and 16 billion barrels of natural gas liquids. These volumes constitute a significant portion of the world's oil and gas resources.

Fact Sheet↗