Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Science and Public Policy”

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
USGS2013

Quality-assurance plan for groundwater activities, U.S. Geological Survey, Washington Water Science Center

This report documents the standard procedures, policies, and field methods used by the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Washington Water Science Center staff for activities related to the collection, processing, analysis, storage, and publication of groundwater data. This groundwater quality-assurance plan changes through time to accommodate new methods and requirements developed by the Washington Water Science Center and the USGS Office of Groundwater. The plan is based largely on requirements and guidelines provided by the USGS Office of Groundwater, or the USGS Water Mission Area. Regular updates to this plan represent an integral part of the quality-assurance process. Because numerous policy memoranda have been issued by the Office of Groundwater since the previous groundwater quality assurance plan was written, this report is a substantial revision of the previous report, supplants it, and contains significant additional policies not covered in the previous report. This updated plan includes information related to the organization and responsibilities of USGS Washington Water Science Center staff, training, safety, project proposal development, project review procedures, data collection activities, data processing activities, report review procedures, and archiving of field data and interpretative information pertaining to groundwater flow models, borehole aquifer tests, and aquifer tests. Important updates from the previous groundwater quality assurance plan include: (1) procedures for documenting and archiving of groundwater flow models; (2) revisions to procedures and policies for the creation of sites in the Groundwater Site Inventory database; (3) adoption of new water-level forms to be used within the USGS Washington Water Science Center; (4) procedures for future creation of borehole geophysics, surface geophysics, and aquifer-test archives; and (5) use of the USGS Multi Optional Network Key Entry System software for entry of routine water-level data collected as part of long-term water-level monitoring networks.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2011

Setting limits: Using air pollution thresholds to protect and restore US ecosystems

More than four decades of research provide unequivocal evidence that sulfur, nitrogen, and mercury pollution have altered, and will continue to alter, our nation's lands and waters. The emission and deposition of air pollutants harm native plants and animals, degrade water quality, affect forest productivity, and are damaging to human health. Many air quality policies limit emissions at the source but these control measures do not always consider ecosystem impacts. Air pollution thresholds at which ecological effects are observed, such as critical loads, are effective tools for assessing the impacts of air pollution on essential ecosystem services and for informing public policy. U.S. ecosystems can be more effectively protected and restored by using a combination of emissions-based approaches and science-based thresholds of ecosystem damage.

Issues in Ecology↗
USGS2011

Setting limits: Using air pollution thresholds to protect and restore U.S. ecosystems

More than four decades of research provide unequivocal evidence that sulfur, nitrogen, and mercury pollution have altered, and will continue to alter, our nation's lands and waters. The emission and deposition of air pollutants harm native plants and animals, degrade water quality, affect forest productivity, and are damaging to human health. Many air quality policies limit emissions at the source but these control measures do not always consider ecosystem impacts. Air pollution thresholds at which ecological effects are observed, such as critical loads, are effective tools for assessing the impacts of air pollution on essential ecosystem services and for informing public policy. U.S. ecosystems can be more effectively protected and restored by using a combination of emissions-based approaches and science-based thresholds of ecosystem damage. Based on the results of a comprehensive review of air pollution thresholds, we conclude: ??? Ecosystem services such as air and water purification, decomposition and detoxification of waste materials, climate regulation, regeneration of soil fertility, production and biodiversity maintenance, as well as crop, timber and fish supplies are impacted by deposition of nitrogen, sulfur, mercury and other pollutants. The consequences of these changes may be difficult or impossible to reverse as impacts cascade throughout affected ecosystems. ??? The effects of too much nitrogen are common across the U.S. and include altered plant and lichen communities, enhanced growth of invasive species, eutrophication and acidification of lands and waters, and habitat deterioration for native species, including endangered species. ??? Lake, stream and soil acidification is widespread across the eastern United States. Up to 65% of lakes within sensitive areas receive acid deposition that exceeds critical loads. ??? Mercury contamination adversely affects fish in many inland and coastal waters. Fish consumption advisories for mercury exist in all 50 states and on many tribal lands. High concentrations of mercury in wildlife are also widespread and have multiple adverse effects. ??? Air quality programs, such as those stemming from the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, have helped decrease air pollution even as population and energy demand have increased. Yet, they do not adequately protect ecosystems from long-term damage. Moreover they do not address ammonia emissions. ??? A stronger ecosystem basis for air pollutant policies could be established through adoption of science-based thresholds. Existing monitoring programs track vital information needed to measure the response to policies, and could be expanded to include appropriate chemical and biological indicators for terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems and establishment of a national ecosystem monitoring network for mercury. The development and use of air pollution thresholds for ecosystem protection and management is increasing in the United States, yet threshold approaches remain underutilized. Ecological thresholds for air pollution, such as critical loads for nitrogen and sulfur deposition, are not currently included in the formal regulatory process for emissions controls in the United States, although they are now considered in local management decisions by the National Park Service and U.S. Forest Service. Ecological thresholds offer a scientifically sound approach to protecting and restoring U.S. ecosystems and an important tool for natural resource management and policy. ?? The Ecological Society of America.

Issues in Ecology↗
USGS2003

Fire and aquatic ecosystems of the western USA: Current knowledge and key questions

Understanding of the effects of wildland fire and fire management on aquatic and riparian ecosystems is an evolving field, with many questions still to be resolved. Limitations of current knowledge, and the certainty that fire management will continue, underscore the need to summarize available information. Integrating fire and fuels management with aquatic ecosystem conservation begins with recognizing that terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems are linked and dynamic, and that fire can play a critical role in maintaining aquatic ecological diversity. To protect aquatic ecosystems we argue that it will be important to: (1) accommodate fire-related and other ecological processes that maintain aquatic habitats and biodiversity, and not simply control fires or fuels; (2) prioritize projects according to risks and opportunities for fire control and the protection of aquatic ecosystems; and (3) develop new consistency in the management and regulatory process. Ultimately, all natural resource management is uncertain; the role of science is to apply experimental design and hypothesis testing to management applications that affect fire and aquatic ecosystems. Policy-makers and the public will benefit from an expanded appreciation of fire ecology that enables them to implement watershed management projects as experiments with hypothesized outcomes, adequate controls, and replication.

Forest Ecology and Management↗
USGS2007

Visitor and community survey results for Prime Hook National Wildlife Refuge: Completion report

This study was commissioned by the Northeast Region of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in support of the Comprehensive Conservation Planning at Prime Hook National Wildlife Refuge (Prime Hook NWR or Refuge). The National Wildlife Refuge Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-57, USC668dd) mandates a Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) for every refuge in the system. A refuge CCP outlines goals, objectives, and management strategies for all refuge programs over the next 15 years, while providing opportunities for compatible, wildlifedependent public uses. The plan evaluates refuge wildlife, habitat, land protection, and visitor service priorities during the planning process. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; Public Law 91-190:852-859.42, U.S.C. and as Amended (P.L. 94-52 and P.L. 94-83) 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347) mandates that the CCP for each refuge must contain an analysis of social and economic conditions (the affected environment) and evaluate social and economic results from likely management scenarios. In addition, public review and comment on alternatives for future management is required. To that end, this research was conducted by the Policy Analysis and Science Assistance Branch (PASA) of the U.S. Geological Survey/Fort Collins Science Center in order to determine how current and proposed CCP planning strategies for Prime Hook NWR could affect: Visitor use Visitor experiences Visitor spending Community residents’ perceptions and opinions Data for this study were collected using a survey administered to visitors to Prime Hook NWR and individuals living in the communities surrounding the Refuge. Surveys were randomly distributed to both consumptive and nonconsumptive use visitors over a one year period (September 2004 to September 2005) to account for seasonal variation in Refuge use. Three hundred thirty-two visitor surveys were returned for a response rate of 80 percent with a confidence interval of ± 5.4. Surveys were also distributed to a stratified random sample of community members in adjacent and surrounding areas (Slaughter Beach, Broadkill Beach, Prime Hook Beach, Milton, Lewes, Milford, and surrounding communities). Four hundred ninety-one surveys from the overall community sample were returned for a response rate of 39 percent with a ± 4.4 confidence interval. Community member results were weighted by U.S. Census Bureau data to correct for age and gender bias, and for community proportionality.

Delaware↗
USGS2015

Formulating the American Geophysical Union's Scientific Integrity and Professional Ethics Policy: Challenges and lessons learned

Creating an ethics policy for a large, diverse geosciences organization is a challenge, especially in the midst of the current contentious dialogue in the media related to such issues as climate change, sustaining natural resources, and responding to natural hazards. In 2011, the American Geophysical Union (AGU) took on this challenge, creating an Ethics Task Force to update their ethics policies to better support their new Strategic Plan and respond to the changing scientific research environment. Dialogue with AGU members and others during the course of creating the new policy unveiled some of the following issues to be addressed. Scientific results and individual scientists are coming under intense political and public scrutiny, with the efficacy of the science being questioned. In some cases, scientists are asked to take sides and/or provide opinions on issues beyond their research, impacting their objectivity. Pressure related to competition for funding and the need to publish high quality and quantities of papers has led to recent high-profile plagiarism, data fabrication, and conflict of interest cases. The complexities of a continuously advancing digital environment for conducting, reviewing, and publishing science has raised concerns over the ease of plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, inappropriate peer review, and the need for better accessibility of data and methods. Finally, students and scientists need consistent education and encouragement on the importance of ethics and integrity in scientific research. The new AGU Scientific Integrity and Ethics Policy tries to address these issues and provides an inspirational code of conduct to encourage a responsible, positive, open, honest scientific research environment.

Book chapter↗
USGS2022

The global environmental agenda urgently needs a semantic web of knowledge

Progress in key social-ecological challenges of the global environmental agenda (e.g., climate change, biodiversity conservation, Sustainable Development Goals) is hampered by a lack of integration and synthesis of existing scientific evidence. Facing a fast-increasing volume of data, information remains compartmentalized to pre-defined scales and fields, rarely building its way up to collective knowledge. Today's distributed corpus of human intelligence, including the scientific publication system, cannot be exploited with the efficiency needed to meet current evidence synthesis challenges; computer-based intelligence could assist this task. Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based approaches underlain by semantics and machine reasoning offer a constructive way forward, but depend on greater understanding of these technologies by the science and policy communities and coordination of their use. By labelling web-based scientific information to become readable by both humans and computers, machines can search, organize, reuse, combine and synthesize information quickly and in novel ways. Modern open science infrastructure—i.e., public data and model repositories—is a useful starting point, but without shared semantics and common standards for machine actionable data and models, our collective ability to build, grow, and share a collective knowledge base will remain limited. The application of semantic and machine reasoning technologies by a broad community of scientists and decision makers will favour open synthesis to contribute and reuse knowledge and apply it toward decision making.

Environmental Evidence↗
USGS2026

Creating usable science: A Southwest Climate Adaptation Science Center study

The southwestern United States consists of diverse ecosystems that are experiencing increasing pressures from rising temperatures, increasing aridity, and sea level rise. To prepare this region for future uncertainty, there is a need for strong partnerships among researchers and societal partners. The Southwest Climate Adaptation Science Center (SW CASC) acts to foster engaged scholarship from diverse perspectives to produce science relevant for management and policy decisions. Here, we synthesized a subset of SW CASC-funded projects and published manuscripts to illustrate how the combination of new scientific knowledge and the research and practice of engaged scholarship produce actionable science with direct societal impacts. In the SW CASC Contributions to Regional Science section, we touch on new research produced from funded projects on the most common topics: (1) Forest Ecosystems, (2) Coastal Ecosystems, (3) Hydrometeorology, and (4) Research on Engaged Scholarship. In the SW CASC Contributions to Regional Impacts section, we outline engaged scholarship activities to demonstrate how they created societal impacts: (1) the Keepers of the Flame course and workshops, (2) the Southwest Fire Climate Adaptation Partnership and the Southern California Montane Forests Project, (3) the Coastal Managers Workshop, (4) the Colorado River Basin Wiki, and (5) the Natural Resource Workforce Development Program. In the SW CASC Publications Cited in Policy section, we used a bibliometric analysis to assess the impact of the SW CASC-funded research on policy. We analyzed how often publications were used in policy documents, finding a citation rate of 27.6%. This is high compared to similar analyses that found peer-reviewed research articles cited at a rate of 3.9% in policy documents. We conclude that coproduced science makes unique and important contributions to the resilience of the Southwest, not only by generating new knowledge but by building capacity, creating lasting relationships, and informing policy and conservation and management decisions.

Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah↗
USGS2005

Quality-assurance plan for ground-water activities, U.S. Geological Survey, Washington Water Science Center

This quality-assurance plan documents the standards, policies, and procedures used by the U.S. Geological Survey's Washington Water Science Center, for activities related to the collection, processing, storage, analysis, and publication of ground-water data. This plan serves as a guide to all Washington Water Science Center personnel involved in ground-water activities, and changes as the needs and requirements of the Washington Water Science Center and Discipline change. Regular updates to this plan represent an integral part of the quality-assurance process.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2016

Surface-water quality-assurance plan for the U.S. Geological Survey Washington Water Science Center

This Surface-Water Quality-Assurance Plan documents the standards, policies, and procedures used by the U.S. Geological Survey Washington Water Science Center (WAWSC) for activities related to the collection, processing, storage, analysis, and publication of surface-water data. This plan serves as a guide to all WAWSC personnel involved in surface-water data activities, and changes as the needs and requirements of the WAWSC change. Regular updates to this plan represent an integral part of the quality-assurance process. In the WAWSC, direct oversight and responsibility by the hydrographer(s) assigned to a surface-water station, combined with team approaches in all work efforts, assure highquality data, analyses, reviews, and reports for cooperating agencies and the public.

Washington↗
USGS2012

2014 Update of the United States National Seismic Hazard Maps

The U.S. National Seismic Hazard Maps are revised every six years, corresponding with the update cycle of the International Building Code. These maps cover the conterminous U.S. and will be updated in 2014 using the best-available science that is obtained from colleagues at regional and topical workshops, which are convened in 2012-2013. Maps for Alaska and Hawaii will be updated shortly following this update. Alternative seismic hazard models discussed at the workshops will be implemented in a logic tree framework and will be used to develop the seismic hazard maps and associated products. In this paper we describe the plan to update the hazard maps, the issues raised in workshops up to March 2012, and topics that will be discussed at future workshops. An advisory panel will guide the development of the hazard maps and ensure that the maps are acceptable to a broad segment of the science and engineering communities. These updated maps will then be considered by end-users for inclusion in building codes, risk models, and public policy documents.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2017

Reducing risk where tectonic plates collide—U.S. Geological Survey subduction zone science plan

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) serves the Nation by providing reliable scientific information and tools to build resilience in communities exposed to subduction zone earthquakes, tsunamis, landslides, and volcanic eruptions. Improving the application of USGS science to successfully reduce risk from these events relies on whole community efforts, with continuing partnerships among scientists and stakeholders, including researchers from universities, other government labs and private industry, land-use planners, engineers, policy-makers, emergency managers and responders, business owners, insurance providers, the media, and the general public. Motivated by recent technological advances and increased awareness of our growing vulnerability to subduction-zone hazards, the USGS is uniquely positioned to take a major step forward in the science it conducts and products it provides, building on its tradition of using long-term monitoring and research to develop effective products for hazard mitigation. This science plan provides a blueprint both for prioritizing USGS science activities and for delineating USGS interests and potential participation in subduction zone science supported by its partners. The activities in this plan address many USGS stakeholder needs: High-fidelity tools and user-tailored information that facilitate increasingly more targeted, neighborhood-scale decisions to mitigate risks more cost-effectively and ensure post-event operability. Such tools may include maps, tables, and simulated earthquake ground-motion records conveying shaking intensity and frequency. These facilitate the prioritization of retrofitting of vulnerable infrastructure; Information to guide local land-use and response planning to minimize development in likely hazardous zones (for example, databases, maps, and scenario documents to guide evacuation route planning in communities near volcanoes, along coastlines vulnerable to tsunamis, and built on landslide-prone terrain); New tools to assess the potential for cascading hazards, such as landslides, tsunamis, coastal changes, and flooding caused by earthquakes or volcanic eruptions; Geospatial models of permanent, widespread land- and sea-level changes that may occur in the immediate aftermath of great ( M ≥8.0) subduction zone earthquakes; Strong partnerships between scientists and public safety providers for effective decision making during periods of elevated hazard and risk; Accurate forecasts of far-reaching hazards (for example, ash clouds, tsunamis) to avert catastrophes and unnecessary disruptions in air and sea transportation; Aftershock forecasts to guide decisions about when and where to re-enter, repair, or rebuild buildings and infrastructure, for all types of subduction zone earthquakes.

Circular↗
USGS2003

The U.S. Geological Survey land remote sensing program

The U.S. Geological Survey has been a provider of remotely sensed information for decades. As the availability and use of satellite data has grown, USGS has placed increasing emphasis on expanding the knowledge about the science of remote sensing and on making remotely sensed data more accessible. USGS encourages widespread availability and distribution of these data and through its programs, encourages and enables a variety of research activities and the development of useful applications of the data. The science of remote sensing has great potential for assisting in the monitoring and assessment of the impacts of natural disasters, management and analysis of environmental, biological, energy, and mineral investigations, and supporting informed public policy decisions. By establishing the Land Remote Sensing Program (LRS) as a major unit of the USGS Geography Program, USGS has taken the next step to further increase support for the accessibility, understanding, and use of remotely sensed data. This article describes the LRS Program, its mission and objectives, and how the program has been structured to accomplish its goals.

Cartography and Geographic Information Science↗
USGS2020

The IPBES global assessment: Pathways to action

The first Global Assessment of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services found widespread, accelerating declines in Earth’s biodiversity and associated benefits to people from nature. Addressing these trends will require science-based policy responses to reduce impacts, especially at national to local scales. Effective scaling of science-policy efforts driven by global and national assessments is a major challenge for turning assessment into action, and will require unprecedented commitments on the part of scientists to engage with communities of policy and practice. Fulfillment of science’s social contract with society, and with nature, will require strong institutional support for scientists’ participation in activities that transcend conventional research and publication.

Trends in Ecology and Evolution↗
USGS2021

Identifying policy-relevant indicators for assessing landscape vegetation patterns to inform planning and management on multiple use public lands

Understanding the structure and composition of landscapes can empower agencies to effectively manage public lands for multiple uses while sustaining land health. Many landscape metrics exist, but they are not often used in public land decision-making. Our objectives were to (1) develop and (2) apply a process for identifying a core set of indicators that public land managers can use to understand landscape-level resource patterns on and around public lands. We first developed a process for identifying indicators that are grounded in policy, feasible to quantify using existing data and resources, and useful for managers. We surveyed landscape monitoring efforts by other agencies, gathered science and agency input on monitoring goals, and quantified the prevalence of potential indicators in agency land health standards to identify five landscape indicators: amount, distribution, patch size, structural connectivity, and diversity of vegetation types. We then conducted pilot applications in four bureau of land management (BLM) field offices in Arizona, California, and Colorado to refine procedures for quantifying the indicators and assess the utility of the indicators for managers. Results highlighted the dominance of upland and the limited extent of riparian/wetland vegetation communities, moderate connectivity of priority vegetation patches, and lower diversity of native vegetation types on BLM compared to non-BLM lands. Agency staff can use the indicators to inform the development of quantitative resource management objectives in land use plans, evaluate progress in meeting those objectives, quantify potential impacts of proposed actions, and as a foundation for an all-lands approach to landscape-level management across public lands.

Environmental Management↗
USGS2012

USGS Environmental health science strategy: providing environmental health science for a changing world: Public review release

America has an abundance of natural resources. We have bountiful clean water, fertile soil, and unrivaled national parks, wildlife refuges, and public lands. These resources enrich our lives and preserve our health and wellbeing. These resources have been maintained because of our history of respect for their value and an enduring commitment to their vigilant protection. Awareness of the social, economic, and personal value of the health of our environment is increasing. The emergence of environmentally driven diseases caused by environmental exposure to contaminants and pathogens is a growing concern worldwide. New health threats and patterns of established threats are affected by both natural and anthropogenic changes to the environment. Human activities are key drivers of emerging (new and re-emerging) health threats. Societal demands for land and natural resources, a better quality of life, improved economic prosperity, and the environmental impacts associated with these demands will continue to increase. Natural earth processes, climate trends, and related climatic events will add to the environmental impact of human activities. These environmental drivers will influence exposure to disease agents, including viral, bacterial, prion, and fungal pathogens, parasites, natural earth materials, toxins and other biogenic compounds, and synthetic chemicals and substances. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) defines environmental health science broadly as the interdisciplinary study of relations among the quality of the physical environment, the health of the living environment, and human health. The interactions among these three spheres are driven by human activities, ecological processes, and natural earth processes; the interactions affect exposure to contaminants and pathogens and the severity of environmentally driven diseases in animals and people. This definition provides USGS with a framework for synthesizing natural science information from across the Bureau and providing it to environmental, natural resource, agricultural, and public-health managers. The USGS is a Federal science agency with a broad range of natural science expertise relevant to environmental health. USGS provides scientific information and tools as a scientific basis for management and policy decision making. USGS specializes in science at the environment-health interface, by characterizing the processes that affect the interaction among the physical environment, the living environment, and people, and the resulting factors that affect ecological and human exposure to disease agents. This report describes a 10-year strategy that encompasses the portfolio of USGS environmental health science. It summarizes national environmental health priorities that USGS is best suited to address, and will serve as a strategic framework for USGS environmental health science goals, actions, and outcomes for the next decade. Implementation of this strategy is intended to aid coordination of USGS environmental health activities and to provide a focal point for disseminating information to stakeholders. The "One Health" paradigm advocated by the World Health Organization (WHO, 2011), and the American Veterinary Medicine Association (AVMA, 2008), among others, is based on a general recognition that the health of humans, animals, and the environment are inextricably linked. Thus, successful efforts to protect that health will require increased interdisciplinary research and increased communication and collaboration among the broader scientific and health community. This strategy is built upon that paradigm. The vision, mission, and five cornerstone goals of the USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy were developed with significant input from a wide range of stakeholders. Vision - The USGS is a premier source of the environmental health science needed to safeguard the health of the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. Mission - The mission of USGS in environmental health science is to contribute scientific information to environmental, natural resource, agricultural, and public-health managers, who use that science to support sound decision making. USGS provides the science to: - Goal 1: Identify, prioritize, and detect contaminants and pathogens of emerging environmental concern. - Goal 2: Reduce the impact of contaminants on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Goal 3: Reduce the impact of pathogens on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Goal 4: Discover the complex interactions and combined effects of exposure to contaminants and pathogens. - Goal 5: Prepare for and respond to environmental impacts and related health threats of natural and anthropogenic disasters. Goals 1 through 4 are intended to provide science to address environmental health threats in a logical order, from informing prevention and preparedness, to supporting systematic management response to environmental health issues. Goal 4 addresses the interaction among contaminants and pathogens, an issue of emerging concern in environmental health science. Goal 5 acknowledges the fact that natural and anthropogenic disasters can cause immediate and prolonged adverse environmental health threats. This strategy proposes that USGS take the following strategic science actions to achieve each of the five goals of this strategy: Goal 1: Identify, prioritize, and detect contaminants and pathogens of emerging environmental concern. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Prioritize contaminants and pathogens of emerging concern to guide research, detection, and management activities. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Conduct surveillance and monitoring to provide early warning of emerging health threats. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Develop approaches and tools that identify vulnerable environmental settings, ecosystems, and species. Goal 2: Reduce the impact of contaminants on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Systematically characterize the sources, occurrence, transport and fate of environmental contaminants to guide efforts to manage and mitigate contamination. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Evaluate the threats of contamination on the health of the environment, fish, wildlife, and people, and inform the associated management and protection efforts. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Characterize potential human exposure to support establishment of health-based standards or guidelines and contamination-reduction efforts. Goal 3: Reduce the impact of pathogens on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Determine the biotic and abiotic factors that control the ecology of infectious diseases affecting natural populations of aquatic and terrestrial species and potential transmission to other animals and humans. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Establish how natural and anthropogenic environmental changes affect the distribution and severity of infectious diseases in natural populations of aquatic and terrestrial species and potential transmission to other animals and humans. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Develop surveillance systems to identify changing patterns of disease activity in priority geographic areas. Goal 4: Discover the complex interactions and combined effects of exposure to contaminants and pathogens. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Identify how exposure to one class of disease agents (contaminants or pathogens) can make an organism more susceptible to effects from exposure to the other class of disease agents. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Implement interdisciplinary studies that characterize the effects of combined exposure to pathogens and contaminants. Goal 5: Prepare for and respond to the environmental impacts and related health threats of natural and anthropogenic disasters. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Establish a formal interdisciplinary science capability to rapidly assess the environmental health risks associated with disasters. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Enhance methods to anticipate, prepare for, and identify environmental, ecological, and related health impacts of future disasters. This strategy is one of seven USGS science strategies developed concurrently: - Climate and Land Use Change - Core Science Systems - Ecosystems - Energy and Mineral Resources - Environmental Health - Natural Hazards - Water. This strategy describes how USGS will address the highest priority environmental health issues facing the Nation. The ultimate intended outcome of this science strategy is prevention and reduction of adverse impacts to the quality of the environment, the health of our living resources, and human health. Communication with, and receiving input from, partners and stakeholders regarding their science needs is essential for successful implementation of this strategy. It is incumbent on USGS to reach out to all stakeholders to ensure that USGS efforts are focused on the highest priority environmental health issues and that products are provided in the most timely and usable form to all those who can use them. USGS must reach out to the scientific community, internally and externally, to ensure that our efforts are integrated with and take full advantage of the activities of others.

Open-File Report↗