Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Natural Sciences Education”

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.

65 records · Page 4Linked to original sources
USGS2013

The SAFRR Tsunami Scenario

The U.S. Geological Survey and several partners operate a program called Science Application for Risk Reduction (SAFRR) that produces (among other things) emergency planning scenarios for natural disasters. The scenarios show how science can be used to enhance community resiliency. The SAFRR Tsunami Scenario describes potential impacts of a hypothetical, but realistic, tsunami affecting California (as well as the west coast of the United States, Alaska, and Hawaii) for the purpose of informing planning and mitigation decisions by a variety of stakeholders. The scenario begins with an Mw 9.1 earthquake off the Alaska Peninsula. With Pacific basin-wide modeling, we estimate up to 5m waves and 10 m/sec currents would strike California 5 hours later. In marinas and harbors, 13,000 small boats are damaged or sunk (1 in 3) at a cost of $350 million, causing navigation and environmental problems. Damage in the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach amount to $110 million, half of it water damage to vehicles and containerized cargo. Flooding of coastal communities affects 1800 city blocks, resulting in $640 million in damage. The tsunami damages 12 bridge abutments and 16 lane-miles of coastal roadway, costing $85 million to repair. Fire and business interruption losses will substantially add to direct losses. Flooding affects 170,000 residents and workers. A wide range of environmental impacts could occur. An extensive public education and outreach program is underway, as well as an evaluation of the overall effort.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2013

AMAP Assessment 2013: Arctic Ocean acidification

This assessment report presents the results of the 2013 AMAP Assessment of Arctic Ocean Acidification (AOA). This is the first such assessment dealing with AOA from an Arctic-wide perspective, and complements several assessments that AMAP has delivered over the past ten years concerning the effects of climate change on Arctic ecosystems and people. The Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP) is a group working under the Arctic Council. The Arctic Council Ministers have requested AMAP to: - produce integrated assessment reports on the status and trends of the conditions of the Arctic ecosystems; - identify possible causes for the changing conditions; - detect emerging problems, their possible causes, and the potential risk to Arctic ecosystems including indigenous peoples and other Arctic residents; and to - recommend actions required to reduce risks to Arctic ecosystems. This report provides the accessible scientific basis and validation for the statements and recommendations made in the Arctic Ocean Acidification Assessment Summary for Policy-makers that was delivered to Arctic Council Ministers at their meeting in Kiruna, Sweden in May 2011 and the related AMAP State of the Arctic Environment report Arctic Ocean Acidification 2013: An Overview . It includes extensive background data and references to the scientific literature, and details the sources for figures reproduced in the overview report. Whereas the Summary for Policy-makers report contains recommendations that focus mainly on policy-relevant actions concerned with addressing the consequences of AOA, the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report also cover issues of a more scientific nature, such as proposals for filling gaps in knowledge, and recommendations relevant to future monitoring and research work. The AOA assessment was conducted between 2010 and 2013 by an international group of over 60 experts. Lead authors were selected based on an open nomination process coordinated by AMAP. A similar process was used to select international experts who independently reviewed this report. Information contained in this report is fully references and based on first and foremost peer-reviewed and published results of research and monitoring undertaken since 2006. It also incorporates some new (unpublished) information from monitoring and research conducted according to well-established and documented national and international standards of quality assurance/quality control protocols. Care has been taken to ensure that no critical probability statements are based on non-peer-reviewed materials. Access to reliable and up-to-date information is essential for the development of science-based decision-making regarding ongoing changes in the Arctic and their global implications. The AOA assessment summary reports and films have therefore been developed specifically for policy-makers, summarizing the main findings of the AOA assessment. The AOA lead authors have confirmed that both this report and its derivative products accurately and fully reflect their scientific assessment. The AOA reports and the films are freely available from the AMAP Secretariat and on the AMAP website: www.amap.no, and their use for educational purposes is encouraged. AMAP would like to express its appreciation to all experts who have contributed their time, efforts and data, in particular the lead authors who coordinated the production of this report. Thanks are also due to the reviewers who contributed to the AOA peer-review process and provided valuable comments that helped to ensure the quality of the report. A list of the main contributors is included at the start of each chapter. The list is not comprehensive. Specifically, it does not include the many national institutes, laboratories and organizations, and their staff, which have been involved in various countries in AOA-related monitoring and research. Apologies, and no lesser thanks are given to any individuals unintentionally omitted from the list. The support from the Arctic countries and non-Arctic countries implementing research and monitoring in the Arctic is vital to the success of AMAP. The AMAP work is essentially based on ongoing activities within these countries, and the countries that provide the necessary support for most the experts involved in the preparation of the AMAP assessments. In particular, AMAP would like to acknowledge Norway for taking the lead-country role in this assessment and thank Canada, Norway, Sweden, USA and the Nordic Council of Ministers for their financial support to the AOA work. The AMAP Working Group is pleased to present its assessment to the Arctic Council and the international science community. Richard Bellerby (AOA assessment Chair) Russel Shearer (AMAP Chair) Lars-Otto Reiersen (AMAP Executive Secretary) Oslo, May 2013

Report↗
USGS2000

U.S. Geological Survey Activities Related to American Indians and Alaska Natives Fiscal Year 2000

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is an impartial scientific organization that strives to produce scientific results that are relevant to the people of the United States and their land and resource managers. USGS does not improve the quality of its customers' lives; it provides the informational tools for American Indians, Alaska Natives, and other customers to understand and improve their own lives. In cooperation with American Indian and Alaska Native governments, the USGS conducts research on water and mineral resources, animals and plants of environmental, economic, or subsistence importance, natural hazards, and geologic resources. Digital data on cartography, mineral resources, stream flows, biota, and other data sets are available to American Indian and Alaska Native institutions. The USGS recognizes the need to learn from and share knowledge with Native peoples. This report describes most of the activities that the USGS conducted with American Indian and Alaska Native governments, educational institutions, and individuals during Federal Fiscal Year 2000. Some of these USGS activities were conducted in concert with the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Others were conducted by Tribes and the USGS. In the year 2000, the USGS began examining its activities related to American Indians and Native Alaskans to determine how it can better serve these customers within its mandates. More Tribal governments, educational institutions, and other Tribal organizations are using geographic information systems and other digital technologies in recent years. As Tribes become more interested and more adept at managing digital information, they are seeking such data from the USGS with greater frequency. The increasing use of such technologies allows Tribal governments additional means of managing lands and resources for the benefit of current and future generations. The USGS recognizes the need to make its information available to Tribal governments, and to work with those governments and other institutions to advance data management capabilities. The USGS is responding to this need by increasing the transfer of scientific information to American Indian and Alaska Native governments and by training employees of these governments to conduct and improve scientific studies. The USGS is also encouraging American Indians and Alaska Natives to pursue careers in science, and seeking ways to hire Indian and Native students. By identifying, improving, and disseminating information about available hiring mechanisms, the USGS is working to make hiring such students easier, and therefore more likely, for USGS managers. The U.S. Geological Survey is the Federal science bureau within the Department of the Interior (DoI). The USGS is non-regulatory and is not a significant manager of Federal or Trust lands or assets. However, there are two types of USGS activities that do involve American Indians, Alaska Natives, and their lands. The first type of activity is the course of formal studies, conducted through existing USGS programs, that involve collection of specific types of data as well as investigative and research projects. These projects have a duration of two or three years, although a few are parts of longer-term activities. Some are funded through cooperative agreements or reimbursable accounts, from monies provided to the USGS by individual Tribal governments or by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). The USGS provides matching funds for cooperative projects. These formal projects may also receive funding from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Indian Health Service (part of the Department of Health and Human Services), or other Federal agencies. The USGS routinely works with its sister bureaus in the Department of the Interior to provide the scientific information and expertise needed to meet the Department's science priorities. Within this context, the USGS and the Bureau of Indian Affairs are cooperating to use USGS knowledge for the benefit of American Indian and Native peoples and their lands. The second type of USGS activity is less formal, based on initiatives designed and conducted by USGS employees. Frequently involving educational activities, these endeavors are prompted by employee interests, often as collateral issues, that result from an individual or group of USGS employees identifying and responding to an observed need. In these activities, USGS employees help us fulfill a mission of the USGS, to make science relevant, while helping their fellow citizens. USGS employees have also taken the initiative to assist American Indians and Alaska Natives through participation in several organizations that were created to foster knowledge of science among Native peoples and to help build support and communication networks. One such group is the American Indian Science and Engineering Society (AISES). This group sponsors an annual national meeting in which USGS employees participate. USGS employees join this organization on a voluntary basis, paying the costs themselves, yet bringing the benefits of this expanded network to the USGS, as many employees do with other professional organizations. Each part of the USGS has identified an American Indian/Alaska Native liaison. As USGS moves to a more regional organizational structure, it will establish contacts in the Western, Central, and Eastern Regions. Within the USGS, this report will help in developing outreach, educational, and program documents for use in future years. It is hoped that USGS employees, American Indians, and Alaska Natives will adapt these activities in new areas and will use the USGS contacts to expand the relevance of the USGS to more Americans.

Report↗
USGS2001

U.S. Geological Survey Activities Related to American Indians and Alaska Natives Fiscal Year 2001

Information is a resource that can help Native American governments and their people. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) makes available technical expertise, reports, and other impartial information sources that can benefit Native Americans interested in subsistence issues, water, land use, and the health of many parts of the environment. The USGS works in cooperation with American Indian and Alaska Native governments, conducting research on water and mineral resources, animals and plants of environmental, economic, or subsistence importance, natural hazards, and geologic resources. Digital data on cartography, mineral resources, stream flow, biota, and other topics are available to American Indian and Alaska Native individuals and institutions. The USGS recognizes the need to learn from and share knowledge with Native peoples. This report describes most of the activities that the USGS conducted with American Indian and Alaska Native governments, educational institutions, and individuals during Federal fiscal year 2001. Some of these USGS activities were carried out in concert with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). Others were conducted by Tribes and the USGS. In 2001, the USGS began examining its activities related to American Indians and Alaska Natives to determine how it can better serve these customers within its mandates. A growing number of Tribal governments, educational institutions, and other Tribal organizations have begun using geographic information systems and other digital technologies in recent years. As Tribes become more interested in and more adept at managing digital information, they are seeking relevant data from the USGS more frequently. Using digital technologies provides Tribal governments with additional means of managing lands and resources for the benefit of current and future generations. The USGS recognizes the need to make its information available to Tribal governments, and to work with those governments and other institutions to advance data management capabilities. The USGS is responding to this need by increasing the transfer of scientific information to American Indian and Alaska Native governments and by training employees of those governments to conduct and improve scientific studies. The USGS is also encouraging American Indians and Alaska Natives to pursue careers in science, and seeking ways to hire Indian and Native students. By identifying, improving, and disseminating information about available hiring mechanisms, the USGS is working to make hiring such students easier, and therefore more likely, for USGS managers. The U.S. Geological Survey is the Federal science bureau within the Department of the Interior (DoI). The USGS is non-regulatory and is not a significant manager of Federal or Trust lands or assets. However, there are two types of USGS activities that do involve American Indians, Alaska Natives, and their lands. The first type of activity is the course of formal studies, conducted through existing USGS programs, that involves collection of specific types of data as well as investigative and research projects. These projects typically last 2 or 3 years, although a few are parts of longer-term activities. Some projects are funded through cooperative agreements, from monies provided to the USGS by individual Tribal governments or by the BIA. The USGS provides matching funds for cooperative projects. These formal projects may also receive funding from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Indian Health Service (part of the Department of Health and Human Services), or other Federal agencies. The USGS routinely works with its sister bureaus in the Department of the Interior to provide the scientific information and expertise needed to meet the Department's science priorities. Within this context, the USGS and the BIA are cooperating to use USGS information resources to benefit American Indian and Alaska Native peoples and their lands. The second type of USGS activity is less formal, based on initiatives designed and conducted by USGS employees. Frequently involving educational activities, these endeavors are prompted by employee interests, often as collateral issues, that result from one or more USGS employees identifying and responding to an observed need. In these activities, USGS employees help fulfill a mission of the USGS-to make science relevant-while helping their fellow citizens. USGS employees have also taken the initiative in assisting American Indians and Alaska Natives through participation in several organizations that were created to foster awareness of science among Native peoples and to help build support and communication networks. One such group is the American Indian Science and Engineering Society (AISES). This group sponsors an annual national meeting in which USGS employees participate. USGS employees join this organization on a voluntary basis, bringing the benefits of this expanded network to the USGS, as many employees do with other professional organizations. Each part of the USGS has identified an American Indian/Alaska Native liaison. Furthermore, the USGS has instituted a regional organizational structure, with Western, Central, and Eastern Regions. The regions work in concert with specific scientific disciplines to conduct the scientific mission of the USGS. The regional structure is intended to bring us closer to our customers; we hope that Native Americans and Alaska Natives will use the contacts listed at the end of this report.

Report↗
USGS2002

U.S. Geological Survey Activities Related to American Indians and Alaska Natives Fiscal Year 2002

Information is a resource for Native American governments, communities, organizations, and people. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) provides technical expertise, reports, and other impartial information sources that benefit Native Americans interested in subsistence issues, water, land use, and the health of many parts of the environment. Native self-sufficiency, economic development, and conservation are cultivated through Native decisions informed with USGS data and analyses. The USGS works in cooperation with American Indian and Alaska Native governments, conducting research on water and mineral resources, animals and plants of environmental, economic, or subsistence importance, natural hazards, and geologic resources. Digital data on cartography, mineral resources, streamflow, biota, and other topics are available to American Indian and Alaska Native individuals and institutions. The USGS recognizes the need to learn from and share knowledge with Native peoples. This report describes most of the activities that the USGS conducted with American Indian and Alaska Native governments, educational institutions, and individuals during Federal Fiscal Year 2002. Some of these USGS activities were carried out in concert with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). Others were conducted by Tribes, Tribal organizations, professional societies, and the USGS. A growing number of Tribal governments, educational institutions, and other Tribal organizations have begun using geographic information systems and other digital technologies in recent years. As Tribes become more interested in and more adept at managing digital information, they are seeking relevant data from the USGS more frequently. Using digital technologies provides Tribal governments with additional means of managing lands and resources for the benefit of current and future generations. The USGS recognizes the need to make its information available to Tribal governments, and to work with those governments and other institutions to advance data management capabilities. The USGS also recognizes that Tribal institutions have varying needs, interests, and capacities. The USGS strives to be sensitive to the unique circumstances of each of these institutions while supporting their self-driven evolution. The USGS is responding to these needs by increasing the transfer of scientific information to American Indian and Alaska Native governments and by training employees of those governments to conduct scientific studies and improve scientific data management. The USGS is also encouraging American Indians and Alaska Natives to pursue careers in science and seeking ways to hire Indian and Native students. By identifying, improving, and disseminating information about available hiring mechanisms, the USGS is working to make hiring such students easier, and, therefore, more likely, for USGS managers. The U.S. Geological Survey is the Federal science bureau within the Department of the Interior (DoI). The USGS is non-regulatory and is not a significant manager of Federal or Trust lands or assets. However, as described in this report, there are several types of USGS activities that involve American Indians, Alaska Natives, and their lands. One type of activity is the course of formal studies, conducted through existing USGS programs, that involves collection of specific types of data as well as investigative and research projects. These projects typically last 2 or 3 years, although a few are parts of longer-term activities. Some projects are funded through cooperative agreements, from monies provided to the USGS by individual Tribal governments, or by the BIA. The USGS provides matching funds for cooperative projects. These formal projects may also receive funding from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Indian Health Service (part of the Department of Health and Human Services), or other Federal agencies. The USGS routinely works with its sister bureaus in the Department of the Interior to provide the scientific information and expertise needed to meet the Department's science priorities. Within this context, the USGS and the BIA are cooperating to use USGS information resources to benefit American Indian and Alaska Native peoples and their lands. The second type of USGS activity is less formal, based on initiatives designed and conducted by USGS employees. Frequently involving educational activities, these endeavors are prompted by employee interests, often as collateral issues, that result from one or more USGS employees identifying and responding to an observed need. In these activities, USGS employees help fulfill a mission of the USGS--to prove scientific relevance--while helping their fellow citizens. Increasingly, some of the educational activities are becoming parts of formal USGS projects. USGS employees have also taken the initiative in assisting American Indians and Alaska Natives through participation in several organizations that were created to foster awareness of science among Native peoples and to help build support and communication networks. One such group is the American Indian Science and Engineering Society (AISES). This group sponsors an annual national meeting in which USGS employees participate. USGS employees join this organization on a voluntary basis, bringing the benefits of this expanded network to the USGS, as many employees do with other professional organizations. Each part of the USGS has identified an American Indian/Alaska Native liaison. The USGS has a regional organizational structure, with Western, Central, and Eastern Regions. The regions work in concert with specific scientific disciplines to conduct the scientific mission of the USGS. The regional structure is intended to bring us closer to our customers; we hope that Native Americans and Alaska Natives will use the contacts listed at the end of this report.

Report↗
USGS2016

Groundwater quality, age, and susceptibility and vulnerability to nitrate contamination with linkages to land use and groundwater flow, Upper Black Squirrel Creek Basin, Colorado, 2013

The Upper Black Squirrel Creek Basin is located about 25 kilometers east of Colorado Springs, Colorado. The primary aquifer is a productive section of unconsolidated deposits that overlies bedrock units of the Denver Basin and is a critical resource for local water needs, including irrigation, domestic, and commercial use. The primary aquifer also serves an important regional role by the export of water to nearby communities in the Colorado Springs area. Changes in land use and development over the last decade, which includes substantial growth of subdivisions in the Upper Black Squirrel Creek Basin, have led to uncertainty regarding the potential effects to water quality throughout the basin. In response, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with Cherokee Metropolitan District, El Paso County, Meridian Service Metropolitan District, Mountain View Electric Association, Upper Black Squirrel Creek Groundwater Management District, Woodmen Hills Metropolitan District, Colorado State Land Board, and Colorado Water Conservation Board, and the stakeholders represented in the Groundwater Quality Study Committee of El Paso County conducted an assessment of groundwater quality and groundwater age with an emphasis on characterizing nitrate in the groundwater. Groundwater-quality samples were collected from 50 randomly selected wells between May and June 2013. The samples were analyzed for major ions, nutrients, dissolved gases, tritium ( 3 H), chlorofluorocarbons (CFC-11, CFC-12, and CFC-113), and fuel products (such as benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes). None of the groundwater samples exceeded the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Primary Drinking Water Regulations for primary maximum contaminant levels (MCL) for major ions. Secondary maximum contaminant levels, which are not health concerns and affect mainly taste, color, or odor of the water, were observed in rare instances for pH (2 samples), chloride (1 sample), iron (3 samples), and manganese (8 samples). The secondary maximum contaminant level for total dissolved solids was also exceeded for two samples. Nitrate (nitrite plus nitrate as nitrogen in groundwater) was elevated above the estimated background concentration of natural recharge waters of 1 milligram per liter (mg/L) in 44 of the 50 wells sampled and showed a median concentration of 5.4 mg/L. Nitrate concentrations were above the MCL of 10 mg/L in 5 of the 50 wells sampled and above half of the EPA MCL (5 mg/L) in 27 of the 50 wells sampled, which included samples above the MCL. Dissolved-oxygen concentrations exceeded 0.5 mg/L in 95 percent of reported values (40 of 42 samples) and exceeded 2.0 mg/L in 90 percent of reported values (38 of 42 samples). The oxidized conditions observed in most areas indicate that nitrate from fertilizers and animal or human waste was geochemically stable and could persist in the groundwater for decades or perhaps longer. A historical analysis of median nitrate concentrations over nearly three decades showed an increase in nitrate of approximately 1 mg/L from 4.3 to 5.4 mg/L, although the increase was not determined to be significantly different using nonparametric statistical methods. Major-ion data indicate that groundwater representative of the primary aquifer was classified as calcium-sodium bicarbonate type water. Other water samples from wells located mainly along the periphery of the primary aquifer had cation-anion compositions consistent with distinct water sources, including groundwater contributions from the underlying bedrock aquifers. The areas with differentiable water sources were located mainly where alluvial deposits were thin and geologic contacts to the underlying bedrock aquifers were relatively shallow. Nitrate concentrations in the groundwater were evaluated for relations to land use. An agricultural region was defined using a sequence of land satellite imagery. Groundwater flow directions interpreted from median water-table elevations measured from 2000 to 2013 were used in conjunction with cropland locations to define the agricultural region boundaries by encompassing potential pathways of nitrate transport in the groundwater from nitrogen-based fertilizers. A statistically significant higher median nitrate concentration was observed for areas inside the agricultural region (6.7 mg/L) compared to areas outside the agricultural region (2.3 mg/L), although median concentrations in both areas were below the MCL (10 mg/L). Median nitrate concentration was also significantly greater in land parcels with septic use (4.9 mg/L) compared to nonseptic parcels (1.7 mg/L). In general, agriculture or septic use was identified as the primary source of nitrate, depending on location, while commercial, county, grazing, and residential land uses were generally secondary sources of nitrate. Apparent groundwater ages were estimated from chlorofluorocarbons (CFC-11, CFC-12, and CFC-113) and tritium ( 3 H) data using models that assumed piston flow and binary mixing (dilution of a young component with old, tracer-free water). The mean and median groundwater ages were about 30 years and the standard deviation was 6 years, indicating that most groundwater in the primary aquifer was “young” water that had recharged to the aquifer over the last few decades (post-1950s). The median fraction of young water was about 71 percent, and the standard deviation was 29 percent. The remaining water predated the 1950s, which may have originated from deeper geologic formations or may represent slow moving groundwater within the primary aquifer. Some of the oldest groundwater ages (older than 30 years) were observed in the upper reaches of the aquifer to the northwest where the primary aquifer is thin and intersects bedrock, supporting the hypothesis of geochemically distinct groundwater entering the primary aquifer from below. Groundwater that had reached the central part of the aquifer from upgradient areas of the basin was variable in age because of differences in flow paths and travel velocities. The groundwater age analysis showed that current (2013) land-use practices could affect water quality over decades to come, and that responses to remedial actions could be slow, especially for constituents, such as nitrate, that are stable under oxidized conditions. Fuel products (including acetone, benzene, diisopropyl ether, ethylbenzene, methyl acetate, methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), methyl tert-pentyl ether, m- + p-xylene, o-xylene, tert-amyl alcohol, tert-butyl alcohol, tert-butyl ethyl ether, and toluene) were analyzed in groundwater from 49 of the 50 wells. Water from seven sites had detections for fuel compounds; all concentrations were below MCL. The results provided assurance of water quality and a valuable baseline to evaluate future trends of fuel constituents as the region is further developed. Probability maps were developed from logistic regression models to examine the likelihood that nitrate concentrations in groundwater exceeded specified levels. Susceptibility analysis examined relations between mid-level (5.0 mg/L) nitrate concentrations and climatic, hydrologic, and geologic variables; the significant variables were identified as depth to groundwater, soil organic matter, and soil water storage to 25-centimeter (cm) depth. The vulnerability assessments included natural factors driving susceptibility but also human factors related to land use and septic use. Vulnerability to low-level (2.5 mg/L) nitrate was related to depth to groundwater, septic zoning, and soil organic matter. The results highlighted that septic zoning affected low-level nitrate concentrations. Vulnerability to mid-level (5.0 mg/L) nitrate was examined using all 50 samples and also with two data outliers removed, which showed relatively high nitrate concentrations but also anomalous water chemistry or were located beyond the primary study area. Vulnerability to mid-level (5.0 mg/L) nitrate using all 50 samples was related to depth to groundwater, land use, septic use within a 500-meter (m) radius, soil water storage to a 25-cm depth, soil organic matter, and whether a location was within the agricultural region. The mid-level (5.0 mg/L) vulnerability model using 48 samples (two outliers removed) produced the best overall fit and was related to the same variables as when using all samples except septic use. The results for mid-level vulnerability provided additional support that septic use was associated with low levels of nitrate in the groundwater. Soil properties and land use were identified as the main drivers of moderate nitrate concentrations. Probabilities of exceeding low-level nitrate concentrations were high in most areas with the lowest probabilities usually to the northwest along thin geologic deposits in the upper part of the basin. The results of this investigation offer the foundational information needed for developing best management practices to mitigate nitrate contamination, basic concepts on water quality to aid public education, and information to guide regulatory measures if policy makers determine this is warranted. Science-based decision making will require continued monitoring and analysis of water quality in the future.

Colorado↗
USGS2002

Book review: Bird census techniques, Second edition

Conservation concerns, federal mandates to monitor birds, and citizen science programs have spawned a variety of surveys that collect information on bird populations. Unfortunately, all too frequently these surveys are poorly designed and use inappropriate counting methods. Some of the flawed approaches reflect a lack of understanding of statistical design; many ornithologists simply are not aware that many of our most entrenched counting methods (such as point counts) cannot appropriately be used in studies that compare densities of birds over space and time. It is likely that most of the readers of The Condor have participated in a bird population survey that has been criticized for poor sampling methods. For example, North American readers may be surprised to read in Bird Census Techniques that the North American Breeding Bird Survey 'is seriously flawed in its design,' and that 'Analysis of trends is impossible from points that are positioned along roads' (p. 109). Our conservation efforts are at risk if we do not acknowledge these concerns and improve our survey designs. Other surveys suffer from a lack of focus. In Bird Census Techniques, the authors emphasize that all surveys require clear statements of objectives and an understanding of appropriate survey designs to meet their objectives. Too often, we view survey design as the realm of ornithologists who know the life histories and logistical issues relevant to counting birds. This view reflects pure hubris: survey design is a collaboration between ornithologists, statisticians, and managers, in which goals based on management needs are met by applying statistical principles for design to the biological context of the species of interest. Poor survey design is often due to exclusion of some of these partners from survey development. Because ornithologists are too frequently unaware of these issues, books such as Bird Census Techniques take on added importance as manuals for educating ornithologists about the relevance of survey design and methods and the often subtle interdisciplinary nature of surveys. Review info: Bird Census Techniques, Second Edition. By Colin J. Bibby, Neil D. Burgess, David A. Hill, and Simon H. Mustoe. 2000. Academic Press, London, UK. xvii 1 302 pp. ISBN 0- 12-095831-7.

Condor↗
USGS1993

Applications of research from the U.S. Geological Survey program, assessment of regional earthquake hazards and risk along the Wasatch Front, Utah

INTERACTIVE WORKSHOPS: ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF THE EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS RESEARCH AND REDUCTION PROGRAM IN THE WASATCH FRONT, UTAH: Interactive workshops provided the forum and stimulus necessary to foster collaboration among the participants in the multidisciplinary, 5-yr program of earthquake hazards reduction in the Wasatch Front, Utah. The workshop process validated well-documented social science theories on the importance of interpersonal interaction, including interaction between researchers and users of research to increase the probability that research will be relevant to the user's needs and, therefore, more readily used. REDUCING EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS IN UTAH: THE CRUCIAL CONNECTION BETWEEN RESEARCHERS AND PRACTITIONERS: Complex scientific and engineering studies must be translated for and transferred to nontechnical personnel for use in reducing earthquake hazards in Utah. The three elements needed for effective translation, likelihood of occurrence, location, and severity of potential hazards, and the three elements needed for effective transfer, delivery, assistance, and encouragement, are described and illustrated for Utah. The importance of evaluating and revising earthquake hazard reduction programs and their components is emphasized. More than 30 evaluations of various natural hazard reduction programs and techniques are introduced. This report was prepared for research managers, funding sources, and evaluators of the Utah earthquake hazard reduction program who are concerned about effectiveness. An overview of the Utah program is provided for those researchers, engineers, planners, and decisionmakers, both public and private, who are committed to reducing human casualties, property damage, and interruptions of socioeconomic systems. PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF EARTHQUAKE MITIGATION POLICIES ALONG THE WASATCH FRONT IN UTAH: The earthquake hazard potential along the Wasatch Front in Utah has been well defined by a number of scientific and engineering studies. Translated earthquake hazard maps have also been developed to identify areas that are particularly vulnerable to various causes of damage such as ground shaking, surface rupturing, and liquefaction. The implementation of earthquake hazard reduction plans are now under way in various communities in Utah. The results of a survey presented in this paper indicate that technical public officials (planners and building officials) have an understanding of the earthquake hazards and how to mitigate the risks. Although the survey shows that the general public has a slightly lower concern about the potential for economic losses, they recognize the potential problems and can support a number of earthquake mitigation measures. The study suggests that many community groups along the Wasatch Front, including volunteer groups, business groups, and elected and appointed officials, are ready for action-oriented educational programs. These programs could lead to a significant reduction in the risks associated with earthquake hazards. A DATA BASE DESIGNED FOR URBAN SEISMIC HAZARDS STUDIES: A computerized data base has been designed for use in urban seismic hazards studies conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey. The design includes file structures for 16 linked data sets, which contain geological, geophysical, and seismological data used in preparing relative ground response maps of large urban areas. The data base is organized along relational data base principles. A prototype urban hazards data base has been created for evaluation in two urban areas currently under investigation: the Wasatch Front region of Utah and the Puget Sound area of Washington. The initial implementation of the urban hazards data base was accomplished on a microcomputer using dBASE III Plus software and transferred to minicomputers and a work station. A MAPPING OF GROUND-SHAKING INTENSITIES FOR SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH: This paper documents the development of maps showing a

Professional Paper↗
USGS2013

Science-based management of public lands in southern Nevada

Landmark legislation provides guiding principles for land management planning in southern Nevada and the rest of the United States. Such legislation includes, but is not limited to, the Forest Service Organic Administration Act of 1897 (16 U.S>C. 473-478, 479-482 and 551), National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (U.S.C. Title 16, Secs. 1-4). Wilderness Act 1964 (P.L.88-577), National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (P.L. 91-190), Endangered Species Act of 1973 (P.L. 91-205), National Forest Management Act of of 1976 (P.L. 94-588), and Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (P.L. 94-579). The acts establishing congressionally designated areas within southern Nevada, such as Lake Mead National Recreation Area, Spring Mountains National Restoration Area, and Desert National Wildlife Refuge, also contain guidelines for the management of these lands. These documents variously require preservation of natural and cultural resource and wilderness character, protection of species, and prevention of undesirable environmental effects from land management actions. These requirements must be met while allowing for multiple "uses" of certain public lands (e.g. recreation, ranching, resources extraction, renewable energy development, etc.) to the degree that they do no threaten preservation, protection, and prevention goals,. many considerations some into play in the development and implementation for land management plans and actions. The planning process requires a balancing act that sometimes pit one need or priority against another. When priorities can trump other needs can prioritized and receive disproportionate consideration. Overall, the management of public lands is a very complicated and sometime contentious process. Science provides an objective way to help weigh quantifiable information and draw conclusions about the effects of past and potential future land management policies, decisions, and actions. When effectively integrated into adaptive management, science-based information can reduce uncertainties, increase knowledge, and improve decision making. However, the specific science information needed for effective management is often lacking or difficult to access or interpret. Science is typically reported in scientific journals as discrete units describing individual studies with other scientists as the primary audience. Translations of these studies an synthesis or multiple studies into formats that can be readily used in land management planning efforts are often lacking. Identifying and articulating the highest priority science and research needs is one of the primary purposes of the Southern Nevada Agency Partnership (SNAP; http://www.SNAP.gov) Science and Research Team (chapter 1; Turner and others 2009). The SNAP Science and Research Strategy (Strategy) calls for a synthesis report to be written every 5 years summarizing the state of knowledge, information gaps and management implications of scientific information as it relates to the SNAP Strategy goals (Turner and others 2009). This General Technical Report serves as the first SNAP Science and Research Synthesis Report (Synthesis Report) commissioned by the Science and Research Team. The Synthesis Report is mostly based on information form the peer-reviewed scientific literature, and is itself peer reviewed and constitutes a new contribution to the scientific literature. This final chapter addresses Sub-goal 2.3, which is to manage current and future authorized southern Nevada land uses in a manner that balances public need and ecosystem sustainability, and Sub-goal 2.5, which is to promote an effective conservation education and interpretation program to improve the quality of resources and enhance public use and enjoyment of southern Nevada public lands. It summarizes information form the previous chapters on what scientific information is known currently and what remains largely unknown, and it discusses how science can be used to make future management decisions that balances public needs and ecosystem sustainability.

Nevada↗
USGS2009

Coastal sensitivity to sea level rise— A focus on the Mid-Atlantic Region

This Synthesis and Assessment Product (SAP), developed as part of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program, examines potential effects of sea-level rise from climate change during the twenty-first century, with a focus on the mid-Atlantic coast of the United States. Using scientific literature and policy-related documents, the SAP describes the physical environments; potential changes to coastal environments, wetlands, and vulnerable species; societal impacts and implications of sea-level rise; decisions that may be sensitive to sea-level rise; opportunities for adaptation; and institutional barriers to adaptation. The SAP also outlines the policy context in the mid-Atlantic region and describes the implications of sea-level rise impacts for other regions of the United States. Finally, this SAP discusses ways natural and social science research can improve understanding and prediction of potential impacts to aid planning and decision making. Projections of sea-level rise for the twenty-first century vary widely, ranging from several centimeters to more than a meter. Rising sea level can inundate low areas and increase flooding, coastal erosion, wetland loss, and saltwater intrusion into estuaries and freshwater aquifers. Existing elevation data for the mid-Atlantic United States do not provide the degree of confidence needed for local decision making. Systematic nationwide collection of high-resolution elevation data would improve the ability to conduct detailed assessments in support of planning. The coastal zone is dynamic and the response of coastal areas to sea-level rise is more complex than simple inundation. Much of the United States consists of coastal environments and landforms such as barrier islands and wetlands that will respond to sea-level rise by changing shape, size, or position. The combined effects of sea-level rise and other climate change factors such as storms may cause rapid and irreversible coastal change. All these changes will affect coastal habitats and species. Increasing population and development in coastal areas also affects the ability of natural ecosystems to adjust to sea-level rise. Coastal communities and property owners have responded to coastal hazards by erecting shore protection structures, elevating land and buildings, or relocating inland. Accelerated sea-level rise would increase the costs and environmental impacts of these responses. Shoreline armoring can eliminate the land along the shore to which the public has access; beach nourishment projects often increase access to the shore. Preparing for sea-level rise can be justified in many cases, because the cost of preparing now is small compared to the cost of reacting later. Examples include wetland protection, flood insurance, longlived infrastructure, and coastal land-use planning. Nevertheless, preparing for sea-level rise has been the exception rather than the rule. Most coastal institutions were based on the implicit assumption that sea level and shorelines are stable. Efforts to plan for sea-level rise can be thwarted by several institutional biases, including government policies that encourage coastal development, flood insurance maps that do not consider sea-level rise, federal policies that prefer shoreline armoring over soft shore protection, and lack of plans delineating which areas would be protected or not as sea level rises. The prospect of accelerated sea-level rise and increased vulnerability in coastal regions underscores the immediate need for improving our scientific understanding of and ability to predict the effects of sea-level rise on natural systems and society. These actions, combined with development of decision support tools for taking adaptive actions and an effective public education program, can lessen the economic and environmental impacts of sea-level rise.

Report↗
USGS2007

Surficial sediment character of the New York-New Jersey offshore continental shelf region: A GIS compilation

Broad continental shelf regions such as the New York Bight are the product of a complex geologic history and dynamic oceanographic processes, dominated by the Holocene marine transgression (>100 m sea-level rise) following the end of the last Pleistocene ice advance ~ 20,000 years ago. The area of the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (U.S. EEZ) territory, extending 200 nautical miles seaward from the coast, is larger than the continental U.S. and contains submerged landforms that provide a variety of natural functions and societal benefits, such as: critical habitats for fisheries, ship navigation and homeland security, and engineering activities (i.e. oil and gas platforms, pipeline and cable routes, potential wind-energy-generation sites). Some parts of the continental margins, particularly inner-continental shelf regions, also contain unconsolidated hard-mineral deposits such as sand and gravel that are regarded as potential aggregate resources to meet or augment needs not met by onshore deposits (Williams, 1992). The present distribution of surficial sediment off the northeastern United States is shaped from the deposits left by the last glaciation and reflects the cumulative effects of sediment erosion, transport, sorting, and deposition by storm and tidal processes during the Holocene rise in sea level. As a result, the sediments on the sea floor represent both an historical record of former conditions and a guide to possible future sedimentary environments. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) through the Coastal and Marine Geology Program, in cooperation with the University of Colorado and other partners, has compiled extant sediment character and textural data as well as other geologic information on the sea floor from all regions around the U.S. into the usSEABED data system (Reid and others, 2005; Buczkowski and others, 2006; Reid and others, 2006). The usSEABED system, which contains information on sediment grain size and lithology for more than 340,500 stations within the U.S. EEZ. has been developed and populated with data as part of the USGS Marine Aggregate Resources and Processes and the National Benthic Habitats projects in order to provide the base-line data needed to update the current maps of offshore surficial geologic character and sediment distribution. The maps are also used to characterize benthic sea floor environments important for marine ecosystems. U.S. Geological Survey, Data Series 118 (Reid and others, 2005), of the usSEABED data release series, represents the combined efforts of the USGS and several other government agencies to provide a unified resource for accessing and preserving records of U.S. east coast sea floor geologic information and sediment texture data. For this present report, we have chosen to focus on the New York-New Jersey region, an area that has been intensely studied by the USGS for many years to address many complex issues. This report illustrates the uses of the usSEABED database for GIS applications, while offering additional insight into the resources and data available from the USGS and its collaborative institutions. This report is based on data contained in U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 118 (Reid and others, 2005) and shows an assortment of example GIS products that are possible using usSEABED. All data are intended to be GIS-ready and should not require any additional cleanup, formatting, or renaming of fields in order to use the data in a Geographic Information System. This project employs the Environmental Systems Research Institute's (ESRI) ArcView™ software. Many of these maps were made as part of the ongoing USGS study to assess marine aggregate resources offshore New York and New Jersey, but these maps can serve many other purposes. The marine science community, educators, students and others are encouraged to use these data to generate GIS products for their own purposes. The objectives of the Marine Aggregate Resources and Processes project are to produce a series of new geologic maps and reports of the sea floor that will provide scientific insights into the character and geologic development of U.S. continental margins and to use these maps and information to assess the potential availability of offshore sand and gravel resources. The mapping and aggregate resource assessments are being conducted on a national scale using the usSEABED data base as described in Williams and others (2003). Potential uses for these data include: (1) defining the geological variability of the sea floor in relation to benthic habitat diversity; (2) improving our understanding of the processes that control the distribution and transport of bottom sediments and benthic habitats; (3) locating aggregate resources for beach nourishment and industrial applications; and (4) providing a detailed geospatial framework for future marine science research, monitoring, and management activities. The initial assessments are in progress for the New York Bight and Louisiana offshore areas.

New Jersey, New York↗