SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Federation Proceedings”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

83 records · Page 5Linked to original sources

USGS2003

Science for avian conservation: Priorities for the new millennium

Over the past decade, bird conservation activities have become the preeminent natural resource conservation effort in North America. Maturation of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP), establishment of Partners in Flight (PIF), and creation of comprehensive colonial waterbird and shorebird conservation plans have stimulated unprecedented interest in, and funding for, bird conservation in the United States, Canada, Mexico, and other countries in the western hemisphere. Key to that success in the United States has been active collaboration among federal, state and local governments, conservation organizations, academia, and industry. The U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), which has primary statutory responsibility for migratory bird conservation and management, has been a key partner. Despite the great strides that have been made in bird conservation science, historical approaches to research and monitoring have often failed to provide sufficient information and understanding to effectively manage bird populations at large spatial scales. That shortcoming, and the lack of an integrated strategy and comprehensive set of research priorities, is more evident in light of the goals established by the North American Bird Conservation Initiative (NABCI). The NABCI is a trinational, coalition-driven effort to provide an organizational umbrella for existing conservation initiatives. The expanded focus of NABCI and individual bird conservation initiatives is to work together in an integrated, holistic fashion to keep common birds common and to increase populations of declining, threatened, and endangered species. To assist bird conservation initiatives in defining goals and developing new approaches to effective research, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the research agency of DOI, convened a workshop, “Science for Avian Conservation: Understanding, Modeling, and Applying Ecological Relationships,” on 31 October–2 November 2000, which brought together 51 scientists from USGS, as well as scientists and conservationists from other agencies and organizations actively participating in NABCI. As the lead federal agency involved in bird conservation research, USGS has a clear legislative mandate to provide scientific information upon which future management plans and actions will be built. This article summarizes key issues and recommendations that arose from that workshop. The principal goal of the workshop was to guide USGS in defining its role, assessing capabilities, and directing future agency planning in support of bird conservation. A major component was to identify key areas of research needed in this new era of bird conservation science. Although tailored to the mission of USGS, workshop recommendations visualize a bold direction for future avian conservation science in which research and monitoring work in tandem with management to increase our understanding of avian populations and the processes that affect them. The USGS is a science agency whose role is to provide objective scientific information to management agencies and therefore is not directly involved in high-level resource policy-making or on-the-ground management decision making. Nevertheless, it is important to note that effective policy decision making must integrate the best available science with political and economic realities to achieve successful avian conservation—an important subject acknowledged in the workshop, but largely beyond its scope of discussion. Williams (2003) questions regarding how scientific information can be effectively communicated to decision makers and incorporated into natural resource policy. Without an aggressive vision and the willingness of researchers, managers, and policy makers to implement it, conservation of North American birds is likely to proceed without the full benefit of scientific investigation. These recommendations represent the principal conclusions drawn by workshop participants and do not necessarily reflect official USGS policy.

The Auk↗

USGS2000

Digital mapping techniques '00, workshop proceedings - May 17-20, 2000, Lexington, Kentucky

Introduction: The Digital Mapping Techniques '00 (DMT'00) workshop was attended by 99 technical experts from 42 agencies, universities, and private companies, including representatives from 28 state geological surveys (see Appendix A). This workshop was similar in nature to the first three meetings, held in June, 1997, in Lawrence, Kansas (Soller, 1997), in May, 1998, in Champaign, Illinois (Soller, 1998a), and in May, 1999, in Madison, Wisconsin (Soller, 1999). This year's meeting was hosted by the Kentucky Geological Survey, from May 17 to 20, 2000, on the University of Kentucky campus in Lexington. As in the previous meetings, the objective was to foster informal discussion and exchange of technical information. When, based on discussions at the workshop, an attendee adopts or modifies a newly learned technique, the workshop clearly has met that objective. Evidence of learning and cooperation among participating agencies continued to be a highlight of the DMT workshops (see example in Soller, 1998b, and various papers in this volume). The meeting's general goal was to help move the state geological surveys and the USGS toward development of more cost-effective, flexible, and useful systems for digital mapping and geographic information systems (GIS) analysis. Through oral and poster presentations and special discussion sessions, emphasis was given to: 1) methods for creating and publishing map products (here, 'publishing' includes Web-based release); 2) continued development of the National Geologic Map Database; 3) progress toward building a standard geologic map data model; 4) field data-collection systems; and 5) map citation and authorship guidelines. Four representatives of the GIS hardware and software vendor community were invited to participate. The four annual DMT workshops were coordinated by the AASG/USGS Data Capture Working Group, which was formed in August, 1996, to support the Association of American State Geologists and the USGS in their effort to build a National Geologic Map Database (see Soller and Berg, this volume, and http://ncgmp.usgs.gov/ngmdbproject/standards/datacapt/). The Working Group was formed because increased production efficiencies, standardization, and quality of digital map products were needed to help the Database, and the State and Federal geological surveys, provide more high-quality digital maps to the public.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2024

U.S. Geological Survey climate science plan—Future research directions

Executive Summary Climate is the primary driver of environmental change and is a key consideration in defining science priorities conducted across all mission areas in the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Recognizing the importance of climate change to its future research agenda, the USGS’s Climate Science Steering Committee requested the development of a Climate Science Plan to identify future research directions. Subject matter experts from across the Bureau formed the USGS Climate Science Plan Writing Team, which convened in September 2022 to identify and outline the major climate science topics of future concern and develop an integrated approach to conducting climate science in support of the USGS and U.S. Department of the Interior missions. The resulting USGS Climate Science Plan identifies three major priorities under which USGS climate science proceeds: (1) characterize climate change and associated impacts, (2) assess climate change risks and develop approaches to mitigate climate change, and (3) provide climate science tools and support. The Climate Science Plan identifies 12 specific goals to achieve the outcomes of the three priorities. Conduct long-term, broad-scale, and multidisciplinary measurements and monitoring and research activities to define, quantify, and predict the impacts of climate change on natural and human systems; Provide leadership to standardize measuring, monitoring, reporting, and verifying greenhouse gas emissions, lateral carbon fluxes, and carbon sinks across lands managed by the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI); Provide science capacity, training, tools, and infrastructure to Tribal partners; support Tribal-led science initiatives; Conduct climate change research in partnership with the broader climate science community; Develop improved data synthesis methods through collaborative and open science across mission areas and between the USGS and agency partners; Translate climate change impacts into risk assessments in support of risk management strategies; Develop new and improved risk assessments, models, and approaches for mitigating climate change, adapting to its impacts, and reducing uncertainties; design early warning systems for risk mitigation; Investigate climate change mitigation strategies and create decision science support tools to inform climate change mitigation and adaptation; Provide a framework that facilitates knowledge co-production needed to inform policy decisions; Provide access to USGS data and information through novel integration and visualization approaches; Build capacity within USGS and DOI through development of scientific training curricula; and Coordinate science and capacity building efforts broadly across the Federal Government. To achieve these goals, the USGS Climate Science Plan also outlines climate science guidelines—key elements for conducting climate-based research—as well as emerging opportunities to support successful climate science. The USGS Climate Science Plan provided in this circular will guide future research priorities and science-support investments, as well as continued development of the climate workforce for decades to come, ensuring that the USGS continues to serve as one of the Nation’s leading climate science agencies.

Circular↗

USGS2000

Population and habitat viability assessments for Golden-cheeked Warblers and Black-capped Vireos: Usefulness to Partners in Flight Conservation Planning

Golden-cheeked Warblers and Black-capped Vireos are Neotropical migratory birds that are federally listed as endangered. Recovery plans for both species advise the use of viability modeling as a tool for setting specific recovery and management targets. Population and Habitat Viability Assessment workshops were conducted to develop population targets and conservation recommendations for these species. Results of the workshops were based on modeling demographic and environmental factors, as well as discussions of management issues, management options, and public outreach strategies. The approach is intended to be iterative, and to be tracked by research and monitoring efforts. This paper discusses the consensus-building workshop process and how the approach could be useful to Partners in Flight. Population and Habitat Viability Assessments (PHVA) were used to develop population targets and conservation recommendations for Golden-cheeked Warblers (Dendroica chrysoparia) and Black-capped Vireos (Vireo atricapillus). This paper explains what PHVAs are, discusses how they are conducted, describes the general results that are produced, and suggests how Partners in Flight (PIF) might use a similar process for bird conservation planning. Detailed results of the assessments are not discussed here; however they can be found elsewhere (U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1996a, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1996b). PHVAs were considered for Golden-cheeked Warblers and Black-capped Vireos because they are controversial, endangered species, and the species? recovery plans list PHVAs as tools to develop recovery recommendations. The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) realized that the data needed to perform PHVAs for these species is limited, but that various conservation efforts, such as the Balcones Canyonlands Conservation Plan and other endeavors, were proceeding without benefit of the biological summarization and guidance that a PHVA could provide.

Book chapter↗

USGS2011

Proceedings of a Coastal and Marine Spatial Planning Workshop for the Western United States

Recent scientific and ocean policy assessments demonstrate that a fundamental change in our current management system is required to achieve the long-term health of our ocean, coasts, and Great Lakes in order to sustain the services and benefits they provide to society. The present (2011) species- and sector-centric way we manage these ecosystems cannot account properly for cumulative effects, sustaining multiple ecosystem services, and holistically and explicitly evaluating the tradeoffs associated with proposed alternative and multiple human uses. A transition to an ecosystem-based approach to management and conservation of coastal and marine resources is needed. Competing uses and activities such as commerce, recreation, cultural practices, energy development, conservation, and national security are increasing pressure for new and expanded resource usage in coastal marine ecosystems. Current management efforts use a sector-by-sector approach that mostly focuses on a limited range of tools and outcomes [for example, oil and gas leases, fishery management plans, and Marine Protected Areas (MPAs)]. A comprehensive, ecosystem-based, and proactive approach to planning and managing these uses and activities is needed. Further, scientific understanding and information are essential to achieve an integrated decision-making process that includes knowledge of ecosystem services, existing and possible future conditions, and potential consequences of natural and anthropogenic events. Because no single government agency has executive authority for coastal or ocean resources, conflicting objectives around competing uses abound. In recent years, regional- and state-level initiatives in Coastal and Marine Spatial Planning (CMSP) have emerged to coordinate management activities. In some respects, the components and steps of the overall CMSP process are similar to how existing ocean resources are regulated and managed. For example, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE) uses spatial planning exercises in State Renewable Energy Task Force meetings to identify competing and conflicting ocean uses, and to delineate areas suitable for renewable energy development. Similarly terrestrial areas such as in national parks and national wildlife refuges managed by the Department of the Interior (DOI) prepare management plans for preservation and restoration of species and habitats of concern, some of which are protected by law. The analogy to CMSP is clear - multiple users and multiple expectations, resulting in the requirement to establish spatial plans for management of different resources and different ecosystem services. A two-day workshop on December 1-2, 2010, was convened for DOI representatives and several key non-DOI participants with roles in CMSP as a step toward clarifying national perspectives and consequences of the National Ocean Policy for the West (appendix 1). Discussions helped to develop an understanding of CMSP from the federal perspective and to identify regional priorities. An overarching theme was to promote a better understanding of current and future science needs. The workshop format included briefings by key Federal agencies on their understanding of the national focus followed by discussion of regional issues, including the needs for scientific information and coordination. The workshop also explored potential science contributions by Federal agencies and others; utilizing current capabilities, data, and information systems; and provided a foundation for possible future regional workshops focusing in turn on the West Coast Region (California, Oregon, and Washington), Pacific Islands (sometimes referred to as Oceania) and Alaska. Participants were asked to share information in the following areas, recognizing that the purpose would be to learn more about the national perspective (see appendixes 2-4): Explore how the Western U.S. (Alaska, Pacific Islands, and West Coast Region) migh

Open-File Report↗

USGS2016

Land-use change reduces habitat suitability for supporting managed honey bee colonies in the Northern Great Plains

Human reliance on insect pollination services continues to increase even as pollinator populations exhibit global declines. Increased commodity crop prices and federal subsidies for biofuel crops, such as corn and soybeans, have contributed to rapid land-use change in the US Northern Great Plains (NGP), changes that may jeopardize habitat for honey bees in a part of the country that supports >40% of the US colony stock. We investigated changes in biofuel crop production and grassland land covers surrounding ∼18,000 registered commercial apiaries in North and South Dakota from 2006 to 2014. We then developed habitat selection models to identify remotely sensed land-cover and land-use features that influence apiary site selection by Dakota beekeepers. Our study demonstrates a continual increase in biofuel crops, totaling 1.2 Mha, around registered apiary locations in North and South Dakota. Such crops were avoided by commercial beekeepers when selecting apiary sites in this region. Furthermore, our analysis reveals how grasslands that beekeepers target when selecting commercial apiary locations are becoming less common in eastern North and South Dakota, changes that may have lasting impact on pollinator conservation efforts. Our study highlights how land-use change in the NGP is altering the landscape in ways that are seemingly less conducive to beekeeping. Our models can be used to guide future conservation efforts highlighted in the US national pollinator health strategy by identifying areas that support high densities of commercial apiaries and that have exhibited significant land-use changes.

North Dakota, South Dakota↗

USGS2018

Drain tiles and groundwater resources: Understanding the relations

Executive Summary Drainage for agricultural production over the past 150 years has been an integral component of human-driven change to Minnesota’s rural landscapes. Benefits of drainage Historically, poorly drained soils across much of the State would often remain saturated or flooded after spring snowmelt, preventing timely farm operations such as tilling and planting crops (Arneman, 1963). Installation of agricultural drainage, both surface ditches and subsurface drainage, accelerated transport of water off farm fields and imparted producers higher crop yields (Beauchamp, 1987; Stoner and others, 1993). Agricultural drainage offered many other benefits such as preventing crop drown out, aerating the soil profile for improved plant growth, limiting surface runoff and soil erosion, and allowing farmers better access to croplands (Fausey and others, 1987). Without agricultural drainage on much of Minnesota’s croplands, it would have been difficult to realize high enough crop yields to remain economically viable. Environmental concerns While drainage of Minnesota croplands provided the benefits mentioned above, several environmental concerns result. These include wetland loss, degradation of downstream water quality, and reduced [potential for] recharge. Early agricultural drainage efforts (pre-20th century) led to the disappearance of much of Minnesota’s natural wetlands. Increased focus on preventing or mitigating wetland loss over the last 50 years has helped curtail further losses, even as agricultural drainage proceeds. Prior to establishment of Minnesota statehood, wetlands accounted for more than 10 million acres in Minnesota, including prairie wetlands, peatlands, and forest wetlands that comprised approximately 19 percent of the total land area (Palmer, 1915; King, 1980). In 2018, only half of Minnesota’s pre-settlement wetlands remain, mostly in parts of the State that have not experienced widespread drainage, such as northern Minnesota. Water-quality monitoring has shown that agricultural drainage, in particular the practice of subsurface drainage, provides a direct flow path for nutrient (nitrogen and soluble phosphorus) losses to surface water resources. The negative consequences of agricultural drainage on surface water quality are well documented (for example, Dinnes and others, 2002; Kladivko and others, 2004; Richards and others, 2008; Rozemeijer and others, 2010; Schottler and others, 2013). Agricultural basins with a high percentage of agricultural drainage have been implicated as part of the cause of the Gulf of Mexico hypoxia zone due to excessive nitrogen export (Goolsby and Battaglin, 2001; Randall and Mulla, 2001). The connection of hydrological effects of agricultural subsurface drainage on groundwater recharge and aquifers, on the other hand, has not been well-established. Agricultural subsurface drainage intercepts infiltrating water below croplands and directly discharges the water to nearby surface waters. However, the size of the water balance shift from drained water that would have evapotranspired or run off the land to drained water that would recharge underlying aquifers has been poorly characterized (Schuh, 2008). Drain Tiles and Groundwater Given the poor accounting of subsurface drainage effects on groundwater resources, the Minnesota Ground Water Association (MGWA) deemed it imperative that we document these effects so that groundwater resources in agricultural regions with substantial drainage can be effectively managed. This white paper documents the relations of drain tiles and groundwater resources and discusses the historical significance of agricultural drainage practices, the recognized positive benefits and potential negative consequences of agricultural drainage practices, and the gaps in understanding of the connections between agricultural drainage and groundwater resources. The major messages emerged from the findings of this white paper are: Complex history. Minnesota has a long history of agricultural drainage, spanning over 150 years. Agricultural drainage, and the eventual widespread usage of subsurface drainage, can be separated into at least four distinct periods of time: (a) early drainage to get water off the land, pre-20th century; (b) the boom and bust era (1900-1945); (c) postwar resurgence of subsurface drainage and early conservation efforts (1945-1960); and, (d) emergence of the environmental movement (1960 to present). The State’s regulatory framework that both allowed for drainage and controlled its usage during these periods is complicated and has been governed by a patchwork of both State and Federal statutes. Drainage Provinces. This white paper advances the concept of tile drainage provinces to aid in the discussion of regional differences in subsurface drainage and its overall effect on groundwater resources. Built upon the concept of groundwater provinces (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 2001), three distinct tile drainage provinces were conceptualized: (1) the Southeastern Province; (2) the SouthCentral Province; and, (3) the Western Province. The distinct geology and the soils that developed in these regions have implications for each region’s subsurface drainage density and the potential implications for groundwater. Knowledge gaps. Several critical knowledge gaps are identified in this paper, creating opportunities for further research to improve our understanding for better managed water resources: Extent of drainage is unknown. Direct estimates of the extent of subsurface drainage do not exist in Minnesota. However, several indirect methods have been utilized to estimate subsurface drainage, from the field-scale to countylevel through the use of geographic information system (GIS) analysis and aerial photography. Based on a 2012 U.S. Geological Survey estimate of subsurface drainage extent (Nakagaki and Wieczorek, 2016), about 21% of the land area in Minnesota has some density of subsurface drainage. Effect of drainage on underlying aquifers is unknown. A basic understanding of unconfined and confined aquifers and their recharge is necessary to connect any hydrological effects from agricultural drainage to groundwater. The basic goal of subsurface drainage to efficiently drain saturated soils clearly alters the water balance in croplands. However, its overall effect on groundwater resources has been poorly characterized, and is in large part determined by the geology below drained areas and the arrangement of underlying aquifers. Water balance shifts. An improved understanding of historical water balance shifts from pre- to post-drainage periods is necessary to understand long-term implications on net groundwater recharge. Also, more direct field-scale studies and indirect modeling studies are needed to characterize water budgets for fields with subsurface drainage.

Minnesota↗

USGS2007

Applying radar technology to migratory bird conservation and management: Strengthening and expanding a collaborative

Executive Summary Understanding the factors affecting migratory bird and bat populations during all three phases of their life cycle—breeding, nonbreeding, and migration—is critical to species conservation planning. This includes the need for information about these species’ responses to natural challenges, as well as information about the effects of human activities and structures. Habitats and other resources critical to migrants during passage and stopover are being destroyed, degraded, and threatened by human activities. Birds and bats are also uniquely susceptible to human use of the airspace. Wind turbines, communication and power transmission towers, and other tall structures, known to cause bird and bat mortality, are being erected or proposed in increasing numbers across the country. In addition, the potential for bird/aircraft collisions poses human safety threats. Management and regulatory agencies, conservation organizations, and industry currently lack the information they need to meet their missions and statutory responsibilities. The biological data available from various radar technologies offer a unique opportunity to learn more about the spatiotemporal distribution patterns, flight characteristics, and habitat use of “aero-fauna.” Recognizing the opportunities presented by radar technologies, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and university partners collaborated first on individual projects and then in a broader, informal “collaborative” to coordinate their radar-related research and work together to develop the suite of products needed for conservation of birds and bats. Having produced two summary documents (Sojda and others, 2005; Ruth and others, 2005), the next objective was to convene a workshop for researchers, management and regulatory agencies, and other interested parties. The focus of this initial workshop was on strengthening the existing USGS-USFWS-university partnership and expanding the “collaborative” to include new Federal agency partners. The subject matter was centered on discussing available technologies, appropriate applications, management-related needs, and ways to strengthen collaborative research and conservation efforts. The workshop opened with presentations about the history of the “radar collaborative,” a description of the workshop objectives and focuses, and a summary of resource management and regulatory needs. Scientific presentations describing current research projects or subjects followed, given by USGS scientists, as well as scientists from other Federal agencies, academia, conservation and ornithological organizations, and a private contracting firm. Presenters addressed a wide variety of management issues including siting of wind-power facilities, bird/aircraft collisions, effects of hurricanes Katrina and Rita on bird migration, bird use of Conservation Reserve Program land, defining bird migration patterns at a broad regional scale, and associating migrant birds with their stopover habitats. Presentations described a variety of radar technologies including NEXRAD weather surveillance radar, modified mobile marine radar, military tracking radar, pencil beam radar, and dual polarization radar, as well as complementary techniques and analysis methods such as acoustic monitoring, thermal imaging, artificial intelligence, and individual-based modeling. Key issues, themes, and questions identified during the open discussions that followed fell into five main categories: (1) agency needs and challenges; (2) radar technology and applications—technical questions and issues; (3) tools and resources for managers and researchers; (4) standardization of protocols; and (5) collaborative opportunities. Participants identified the following management, regulatory, or business issues facing them which may be addressed with radar technologies: tall structures; wind turbines; identification and protection of key habitats; assessment of management activities; and bird/aircraft strikes. Participants frequently expressed the need for specific information about which radar technologies are best used for answering particular questions. User groups emphasized the importance of clear, defensible scientific information on which they can base their activities. In turn, researchers emphasized their need for clearly defined, specific questions from managers so that they can design and conduct the required research. Discussions about technical issues requiring further research and collaboration included target identity, ground-truthing, linking migrants to habitat, and standardized protocols for applied research. Workshop participants identified and endorsed a series of seven action items that would promote collaboration and begin to address key issues identified at the workshop: Action Item #1 : Establish a working subgroup to address large-scale surveillance radar standardization issues. Action Item #2 : Establish a working subgroup to address small-scale radar standardization issues. Action Item #3 : Bring management and regulatory agencies together to identify the three most important information needs for each key management issue relating to radar technologies. Action Item #4 : Develop Fact Sheet(s) to provide information about radar technology applications to migratory bird and bat conservation issues. Action Item #5 : Create a “radar collaborative” Website to provide information about radar biology applications, contacts, publications, and so forth. Action Item #6 : Formalize and expand the USGS-USFWS “radar collaborative.” Action Item #7 : Advance basic research, such as target identity and validation, which will support and improve our abilities to apply radar technologies to conservation objectives. There was considerable interest in expanding the “radar collaborative” to include those agencies, organizations, and industries represented at the workshop. It was felt that the publication of the workshop proceedings, implementation of action items, and additional future meetings or workshops will be crucial in strengthening the “radar collaborative” effort and promoting the use of these valuable technologies for conserving migratory species.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2010

Geophysical studies of the West Antarctic rift system

The West Antarctic rift system extends over a 3000 × 750 km, largely ice covered area from the Ross Sea to the base of the Antarctic Peninsula, comparable in area to the Basin and Range and the East African rift system. A spectacular rift shoulder scarp along which peaks reach 4–5 km maximum elevation marks one flank and extends from northern Victoria Land-Queen Maud Mountains to the Ellsworth-Whitmore-Horlick Mountains. The rift shoulder has maximum present physiographic relief of 5 km in the Ross Embayment and 7 km in the Ellsworth Mountains-Byrd Subglacial Basin area. The Transantarctic Mountains part of the rift shoulder (and probably the entire shoulder) has been interpreted as rising since about 60 Ma, at episodic rates of ∼1 km/m.y., most recently since mid-Pliocene time, rather than continuously at the mean rate of 100 m/m.y. The rift system is characterized by bimodal alkaline volcanic rocks ranging from at least Oligocene to the present. These are exposed asymmetrically along the rift flanks and at the south end of the Antarctic Peninsula. The trend of the Jurassic tholeiites (Ferrar dolerites, Kirkpatric basalts) marking the Jurassic Transantarctic rift is coincident with exposures of the late Cenozoic volcanic rocks along the section of the Transantarctic Mountains from northern Victoria Land to the Horlick Mountains. The Cenozoic rift shoulder diverges here from the Jurassic tholeiite trend, and the tholeiites are exposed continuously (including the Dufek intrusion) along the lower- elevation (1–2 km) section of Transantarctic Mountains to the Weddell Sea. Widely spaced aeromagnetic profiles in West Antarctica indicate the absence of Cenozoic volcanic rocks in the ice covered part of the Whitmore-Ellsworth-Mountain block and suggest their widespread occurrence beneath the western part of the ice sheet overlying the Byrd Subglacial Basin. A German Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources (BGR)-U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) aeromagnetic survey over the Ross Sea continental shelf indicates rift fabric and suggests numerous submarine volcanoes along discrete NNW trending zones. A Bouguer anomaly range of approximately 200 (+50 to −150) mGal having 4–7 mGal/km gradients where measured in places marks the rift shoulder from northern Victoria Land possibly to the Ellsworth Mountains (where data are too sparse to determine maximum amplitude and gradient). The steepest gravity gradients across the rift shoulder require high density (mafic or ultramafic?) rock within the crust as well as at least 12 km of thinner crust beneath the West Antarctic rift system in contrast to East Antarctica. Sparse land seismic data reported along the rift shoulder, where velocities are greater than 7 km/s, and marine data indicating velocities above 7 km/s beneath the Ross Sea continental shelf support this interpretation. The maximum Bouguer gravity range in the Pensacola Mountains area of the Transantarctic Mountains is only about 130 mGal with a maximum 2 mGal/km gradient, which can be explained solely by 8 km of crustal thickening. Large offset seismic profiles over the Ross Sea shelf collected by the German Antarctic North Victoria Land Expedition V (GANOVEX V) combined with earlier USGS and other results indicate 17–21 km thickness for the crust beneath the Ross Sea shelf which we interpret as evidence of extended rifted continental crust. A regional positive Bouguer anomaly (0 to +50 mGal), the width of the rift, extends from the Ross Sea continental shelf throughout the Ross Embayment and Byrd Subglacial Basin area of the West Antarctic rift system and indicates that the Moho is approximately 20 km deep tied to the seismic results (probably coincident with the top of the asthenosphere) rather than the 30 km reported in earlier interpretations. The interpretation of horst and graben structures in the Ross Sea, made from marine seismic reflection data, probably can be extended throughout the rift (i.e., the Ross Ice shelf and the Byrd Subglacial Basin areas). The near absence of earthquakes in the West Antarctic rift system probably results from a combination of primarily sparse seismograph coverage and, secondarily, suppression of earthquakes by the ice sheet (e.g., Johnston, 1987) and very high seismicity shortly after deglaciation in the Ross Embayment followed by abnormally low seismicity at present (e.g., Muir Wood, 1989). The evidence of high temperatures at shallow depth beneath the Ross Sea continental shelf and adjacent Transantarctic Mountains is supportive of thermal uplift of the mountains associated with lateral heat conduction from the rift and can possibly also explain the volcanism, rifting, and high elevation of the entire rift shoulder to the Ellsworth-Horlick-Whitmore Mountains. We infer that the Gondwana breakup and the West Antarctic rift are part of a continuously propagating rift that started in the Jurassic when Africa separated from East Antarctica (including the failed Jurassic Transantarctic rift). Rifting proceeded clockwise around East Antarctica to the separation of New Zealand and the Campbell Plateau about 85–95 Ma and has continued (with a spreading center jump) to its present location in the Ross Embayment and West Antarctica. The Cenozoic activity of the West Antarctic rift system appears to be continuous in time with rifting in the same area that began only in the late Mesozoic. Although the mechanism for rifting is not completely explained, we suggest a combination of the flexural rigidity model (Stem and ten Brink, 1989) proposed for the Ross Embayment and the thermal plume or hot spot concepts. The propagating rift may have been “captured” by the thermal plume.

Tectonics↗

USGS1966

Water in the Humboldt River Valley near Winnemucca, Nevada

Most of the work of the interagency Humboldt River Research Project in the Winnemucca reach of the Humboldt River valley has been completed. More than a dozen State and Federal agencies and several private organizations and individuals participated in the study. The major objective of the project, which began in 1959, is to evaluate the water resources of the entire Humboldt River basin. However, because of the large size of the basin, most of the work during the first 5 years of the project was done in the Winnemucca area. The purpose of this report is to summarize briefly and simply the information regarding the water resources of the Winnemucca area-especially the quantitative aspects of the flow system-given in previous reports of the project. The Winnemucca reach of the Humboldt River valley, which is in north-central Nevada, is about 200 miles downstream from the headwaters of the Humboldt River and includes that part of the valley between the Comus and Rose Creek gaging stations. Average annual inflow to the storage area (the valley lowlands) in the Winnemucca reach in water years 1949-62 was about 250,000 acre-feet. Of this amount, about 68 percent was Humboldt River streamflow, as measured at the Comus gaging station, 23 percent was precipitation directly on the storage area, 6 percent was ground-water inflow, and about 3 percent was tributary streamflow. Average annual streamflow at the Rose Creek gaging station during the same period was about 155,000 acre-feet, or about 17,000 acre-feet less than that at the Comus gaging station. Nearly all the streamflow lost was consumed by evapotranspiration in the project area. Total average annual evapotranspiration loss during the period was about 115,000 acre-feet, or about 42 percent of the total average annual outflow. The most abundant ions in the ground and surface water in the area are commonly sodium and bicarbonate. Much of the water has a dissolved-solids content that ranges from 500 to 750 parts per million; however, locally, the dissolved-solids content of the ground water is more than 5,000 parts per million. The chemical quality of the Humboldt River, especially during periods of low flow, reflects the chemical quality of ground-water inflow from tributary areas that discharges into the river. Almost all water in the project area is moderately hard to very hard; otherwise, it is generally suitable for most uses. Increased ground-water development, the conjunctive use of ground and surface water, and increased irrigation efficiency would probably conserve much of the water presently consumed by nonbeneficial evapotranspiration. Intensive ground-water development, especially from the highly permeable medial gravel subunit, will, however, decrease the flow of the Humboldt River to the extent that some pumpage may not be offset by a corresponding decrease in natural evapotranspiration losses. Such streamflow depletions will therefore infringe upon downstream surface-water rights. The results of this study indicate that the Humboldt River and ground water in the unconsolidated deposits beneath and adjacent to the river in the Winnemucca area are closely related. Somewhat similar conditions probably exist elsewhere in the Humboldt River valley. Additional detailed studies are needed-both upstream and downstream from the Winnemucca area-to adequately define the flow system and the interrelations among the components of the system in the remainder of the valley. Before proceeding with additional detailed studies, however, a 1-year overall appraisal of the water resources of the basin should be considered. A major objective of this study would be to provide information that would help select the next subarea of the valley to be studied in detail and to decide which of the methods of study used in the Winnemucca area could be most effectively used in the future studies.

Water Supply Paper↗

USGS2018

United States bat species of concern: A synthesis

In 1994 the federal government designated 24 species or subspecies of bats in the United States (U.S.) and its territories as Category 2 candidates for listing as Endangered or Threatened under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. Category 2 was eliminated in 1996, but taxa previously receiving this designation were informally considered “species of concern”. Various state and federal agencies and conservation organizations assigned bat species of concern to more formal conservation categories. Some of the original 24 taxa designated as Category 2 candidates in 1994 were later listed as Endangered, whereas others were subject to refinements in knowledge of their taxonomy and distribution. The remaining 20 species of bats have the subjects of increased research efforts over the past two decades, and are the focus of this review. Two species occur in the U.S. Territories. All of the 18 mainland species ranges include areas west of the Mississippi River (15 are found primarily in western states), and 13 occur in California (72% of the 18 mainland species). In this review, we provide a comprehensive summary of the literature pertinent to the conservation designations, systematics, distribution, habitats, relative abundance, foraging, diet, roosting ecology, population ecology, and management of each of these 20 species. The species of concern are distributed among four families of bats. The Samoan flying fox (Pteropus samoensis) belong to the old-world family Pteropodidae. The California leaf-nosed bat (Macrotus californicus), red fruit bat (Stenoderma rufum), and Mexican long-tongued bat (Choeronycteris mexicana) are members of the new-world family Phyllostomidae. Three species belong to the cosmopolitan family Molossidae: the greater bonneted bat (Eumops perotis californicus), Underwood’s bonneted bat (Eumops underwoodi), and the big free-tailed bat (Nyctinomops macrotis). Most bat species of concern are in the globally distributed family Vespertilionidae: Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii), Rafinesque’s big-eared bat (C. rafinesquii), spotted bat (Euderma maculatum), Allen’s big-eared bat (Idionycteris phyllotis), southeastern myotis (M. austroriparius), western small-footed myotis (Myotis ciliolabrum), long-eared myotis (M. evotis), eastern small-footed myotis (M. leibii), Arizona myotis (M. occultus), fringed myotis (M. thysanodes), cave myotis (M. velifer), long-legged myotis (M. volans), and Yuma myotis (M. yumanensis). An impressive amount of knowledge has accumulated about these species since their informal designation as species of concern, but this knowledge is unevenly distributed. Comparatively little research has been conducted on the Samoan flying fox and the red fruit bat over the past decade in tropical territories, nor on the Mexican long-tongued bat and Underwood’s mastiff bat in the southwestern U.S. Within temperate regions of the U.S., habitat use of two eastern species that roost in hollow trees or caves (southeastern myotis and Rafinesque’s big-eared bat) has been the focus of much research, as have aspects of the biology of cave-roosting and tree-roosting western species, particularly where information about management of forests, caves and abandoned mines can be used to benefit bat conservation. Comparatively less information has accrued about species that roost in rock crevices and high on cliff faces. Other major gaps in information are also identified. We anticipate that this review will help guide future research and conservation efforts directed at the bat species of concern.

Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences,↗