Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Minerals Management Service”

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 91 records · Page 5Linked to original sources
USGS2014

Quantifying and valuing ecosystem services: An application of ARIES to the San Pedro River basin, USA

A large body of research exists that identifies and values ecosystem services - the benefits that ecosystems provide to humans (MA, 2005) - and their underlying ecological processes. However, the development of software decision support tools that integrate ecology, economics and geography that can be independently used within the public, private, academic and NGO sectors is a more recent phenomenon (Ruhl et al., 2007; Daily et al., 2009). Spurred by growing demand for more sophisticated analysis of the social and economic consequences of land management decisions, the US Department of Interior - Bureau of Land Management (BLM) launched a pilot project with the US Geological Survey (USGS) to assess the usefulness and feasibility of ecosystem service assessment and valuation tools to provide inputs to decision-making. The project analysed ecosystem services in the US portion of the San Pedro River watershed, which includes the BLM-managed San Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area (SPRNCA), to improve the understanding of complex social and ecological relationships that transcend administrative divisions. The BLM manages some 99 million hectares, primarily in the western United States, and 283 million hectares of sub-surface mineral estate. BLM's multiple-use mission requires that it appropriately balance non-extractive uses such as habitat conservation, recreation and archaeological heritage protection and the extractive use of resources such as timber, oil and gas, coal, uranium, and other minerals.

Arizona↗
USGS2010

Geologic Map of the House Rock Valley Area, Coconino County, Northern Arizona

This geologic map is a cooperative effort of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service, and the U.S. Forest Service to provide a geologic database for resource management officials and visitor information services. This map was produced in response to information needs related to a proposed withdrawal of three segregated land areas near Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona, from new hard rock mining activity. House Rock Valley was designated as the east parcel of the segregated lands near the Grand Canyon. This map was needed to provide connectivity for the geologic framework of the Grand Canyon segregated land areas. This geologic map of the House Rock Valley area encompasses approximately 280 mi2 (85.4 km2) within Coconino County, northern Arizona, and is bounded by longitude 111 degrees 37'30' to 112 degrees 05' W. and latitude 36 degrees 30' to 36 degrees 50' N. The map area is in the eastern part of the Arizona Strip, which lies within the southern Colorado Plateaus geologic province (herein Colorado Plateau). The Arizona Strip is the part of Arizona lying north of the Colorado River. The map is bound on the east by the Colorado River in Marble Canyon within Grand Canyon National Park and Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, on the south and west by the Kaibab National Forest and Grand Canyon National Game Preserve, and on the north by the Vermilion Cliffs Natural Area, the Paria Canyon Vermilion Cliffs Wilderness Area, and the Vermilion Cliffs National Monument. House Rock State Buffalo Ranch also bounds the southern edge of the map area. The Bureau of Land Management Arizona Field Office in St. George, Utah, manages public lands of the Vermilion Cliffs Natural Area, Paria Canyon - Vermilion Cliffs Wilderness and Vermilion Cliffs National Monument. The North Kaibab Ranger District in Fredonia, Arizona, manages U.S. Forest Service land along the west edge of the map area and House Rock State Buffalo Ranch. Other lands include about 13 sections of Arizona State land, about ? of a section of private land along House Rock Wash, and about 1? sections of private land at Cliff Dwellers Lodge, Vermilion Cliffs Lodge, and Marble Canyon, Arizona. Landmark features within the map area include the Vermilion Cliffs, Paria Plateau, Marble Canyon, and House Rock Valley. Surface drainage in House Rock Valley is to the east toward the Colorado River in Marble Canyon. Large tributaries of Marble Canyon from north to south include Badger Canyon, Soap Creek, Rider Canyon, North Canyon, Bedrock Canyon, and South Canyon. Elevations range from about 2,875 ft (876 m) at the Colorado River in the southeast corner of the map to approximately 7,355 ft (2,224 m) on the east rim of Paria Plateau along the north-central edge of the map area. Three small settlements are in the map area along U.S. Highway 89A, Cliff Dwellers Lodge, Vermilion Cliffs Lodge, and Marble Canyon, Arizona. The community of Jacob Lake is about 9 mi (14.5 km) west of House Rock Valley on the Kaibab Plateau. Lees Ferry is 5 mi (8 km) north of Marble Canyon and marks the confluence of the Paria and Colorado Rivers and the beginning of Marble Canyon. U.S. Highway 89A provides access to the northern part of the map area. Dirt roads lead south into House Rock Valley from U.S. Highway 89A and are collectively maintained by the Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. National Forest Service, and the Grand Canyon Trust. House Rock Valley is one of the few remaining areas where uniform geologic mapping is needed for connectivity to the regional Grand Canyon geologic framework. This information is useful to Federal and State resource managers who direct environmental and land management programs that encompass such issues as range management, biological studies, flood control, water, and mineral-resource investigations. The geologic information will support future and ongoing geologic investigations and scientific studies

Scientific Investigations Map↗
USGS2012

The U.S. Geological Survey Ecosystem Science Strategy, 2012-2022 - Advancing discovery and application through collaboration

Ecosystem science is critical to making informed decisions about natural resources that can sustain our Nation’s economic and environmental well-being. Resource managers and policy-makers are faced with countless decisions each year at local, state, tribal, territorial, and national levels on issues as diverse as renewable and non-renewable energy development, agriculture, forestry, water supply, and resource allocations at the urban-rural interface. The urgency for sound decision-making is increasing dramatically as the world is being transformed at an unprecedented pace and in uncertain directions. Environmental changes are associated with natural hazards, greenhouse gas emissions, and increasing demands for water, land, food, energy, mineral, and living resources. At risk is the Nation’s environmental capital, the goods and services provided by resilient ecosystems that are vital to the health and well-being of human societies. Ecosystem science—the study of systems of organisms interacting with their environment and the consequences of natural and human-induced change on these systems—is necessary to inform decision-makers as they develop policies to adapt to these changes. This Ecosystems Science Strategy is built on a framework that includes basic and applied science. It highlights the critical roles that USGS scientists and partners can play in building scientific understanding and providing timely information to decision-makers. The strategy underscores the connection between scientific discoveries and the application of new knowledge. The strategy integrates ecosystem science and decision-making, producing new scientific outcomes to assist resource managers and providing public benefits. The USGS is uniquely positioned to play an important role in ecosystem science. With its wide range of expertise, the agency can bring holistic, cross-scale, interdisciplinary capabilities to the design and conduct of monitoring, research, and modeling and to new technologies for data collection, management, and visualization. Collectively, these capabilities can be used to reveal ecological patterns and processes, explain how and why ecosystems change, and forecast change over different spatial and temporal scales. USGS science can provide managers with options and decision-support tools to use resources sustainably. The USGS has long-standing, collaborative relationships with the DOI and other partners in the natural sciences, in both conducting science and its application. The USGS engages these partners in cooperative investigations that otherwise would lack the necessary support or be too expensive for a single bureau to conduct. The heart of this strategy is a framework and vision for USGS ecosystems science that focuses on five long-term goals, which are seen as interconnected and reinforcing components: • Improve understanding of ecosystem structure, function, and processes. The focus for this goal is an understanding of how ecosystems work, including the dynamics of species, their populations, interactions, and genetics, and how they change across spatial and temporal scales. • Advance understanding of how drivers influence ecosystem change. The challenges here are explaining the drivers of ecosystem change, their spatio-temporal patterns, their uncertainties and interactions, and their influence on ecosystem processes and dynamics. • Improve understanding of the services that ecosystems provide to society. Here the emphasis is on the measurement of environmental capital and ecosystem services, and the identification of sources and patterns of change in space and time. • Develop tools, technologies, and capacities to inform decision-making about ecosystems. This includes developing new technologies and approaches for conducting applications-oriented ecosystem science. A principal challenge will be how to quantify uncertainty and incorporate it in decision analysis. • Apply science to enhance strategies for management, conservation, and restoration of ecosystems. These challenges include development of novel approaches to monitoring, assessment, and restoration of ecosystems; new methods to address species of concern and communities at risk; and innovations in decision analysis and support to address imminent ecosystem changes or those that are underway. Closely integrated with the five goals are four strategic approaches that provide the path forward for the USGS Ecosystems Mission Area. These approaches cross-cut all of the goals and are seen as essential to the implementation of this strategy: • Assess information needs for ecosystem science through enhanced partnerships. Work with the DOI and other agencies and institutions to identify, design, and implement priority decision-driven ecological research. • Promote the use of interdisciplinary ecosystem science. Design and conduct interdisciplinary process-oriented research in ecosystem science. • Enhance modeling and forecasting. Build models to forecast ecosystem change, assess future management scenarios, and reduce uncertainties through an adaptive learning process. • Support decision-making. Use quantitative approaches to assess the vulnerabilities of ecosystems, habitats, and species, and evaluate strategies for adaptation, restoration, and sustainable management. Following the strategic approaches are a set of proposed actions that represent a sampling of specific activities that align with this strategy and that address the Nation’s most pressing environmental needs. The strategy emphasizes coordination of activities across the USGS mission areas pursuant to these goals. Ecosystem science is inherently interdisciplinary and requires a broad perspective that incorporates the biological and physical sciences, climate science, information technology, and scientific capacity in mission areas across the Bureau. With its emphasis on coordination, this strategy can provide a critical underpinning for integrated science efforts with scientists from multiple mission areas of the USGS working together. Of course, the USGS will continue to conduct both discipline-specific and interdisciplinary investigations, and both will continue to be vital parts of the ecosystem science portfolio. Finally, the strategy stresses the importance of coordination with other Federal agencies and organizations in the natural resources community. The USGS collaborates with resource agencies in the DOI and other organizations throughout the world to meet societal needs for species and ecosystem management. Working with these agencies and organizations, the USGS will play a key role over the next decade in advancing the scientific foundation for sustaining the natural resources that diverse, productive, resilient ecosystems provide.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2007

Earth science and public health: Proceedings of the Second National Conference on USGS Health-Related Research

The mission of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is to serve the Nation by providing reliable scientific information to describe and understand the earth; minimize loss of life and property from natural disasters; manage water, biological, energy, and mineral resources; and enhance and protect our quality of life. As the Nation?s largest water, earth, and biological science and civilian mapping agency, the USGS can play a significant role in providing scientific knowledge and information that will improve our understanding of the relations of environment and wildlife to human health and disease. USGS human health-related research is unique in the Federal government because it brings together a broad spectrum of natural science expertise and information, including extensive data collection and monitoring on varied landscapes and ecosystems across the Nation. USGS can provide a great service to the public health community by synthesizing the scientific information and knowledge on our natural and living resources that influence human health, and by bringing this science to the public health community in a manner that is most useful. Partnerships with health scientists and managers are essential to the success of these efforts. USGS scientists already are working closely with the public health community to pursue rigorous inquiries into the connections between natural science and public health. Partnering agencies include the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Agency for Toxic Substances Disease Registry, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Food and Drug Administration, Mine Safety and Health Administration, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Public Health Service, and the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases. Collaborations between public health scientists and earth scientists can lead to improved solutions for existing and emerging environmental health problems. This report summarizes the presentations and discussions held at the Second National Conference on USGS Health-Related Research, held at the USGS national headquarters in Reston, Virginia. The report presents 68 abstracts of technical presentations made at the conference and summaries of six topical breakout sessions. The abstracts cover a broad range of issues and demonstrate connections between human health and the quality and condition of our environment and wildlife. The summaries of the topical breakout sessions present ideas for advancing interdisciplinary science in areas of earth science and human health.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS1975

A brief history of the U.S. Geological Survey

Established by an Act of Congress in 1879 and charged with responsibility for "classification of the public lands, and examination of the geological structure, mineral resources, and products of the national domain," the U. S. Department of the Interior's Geological Survey has been the Nation's principal source of information about its physical resources the configuration and character of the land surface, the composition and structure of the underlying rocks, and the quality, extent, and distribution of water and mineral resources. Although primarily a research and fact-finding agency, it has responsibility also for the classification of Federal mineral lands and waterpower sites, and since 1926 it has been responsible for the supervision of oil and mining operations authorized under leases on Federal land. From the outset, the Survey has been concerned with critical land and resource problems. Often referred to as the Mother of Bureaus, many of its activities led to the formation of new organizations where a management or developmental function evolved. These included the Reclamation Service (1902), the Bureau of Mines (1910), the Federal Power Commission (1920), and the Grazing Service (1934, since combined with other functions as the Bureau of Land Management). Mrs. Rabbitt's summary of the Survey's history in the following pages brings out well the development of these diverse activities and the Survey's past contributions to national needs related to land and resources.

General Information Product↗
USGS1981

Mineral resource potential of the Centennial Mountains Wilderness Study Area and contiguous areas, Idaho and Montana

The Centennial Mountains include parts of Beaverhead County, Montana, and Clark and Fremont Counties, Idaho; the mountains trend east, and the Continental Divide follows their crest (fig. 1). They form a massive, almost impassable barrier between Centennial Valley on the north and the broad expanse of the Snake River Plain on the south. The proposed Wilderness Study Area encompasses the central more rugged part of the mountains and includes parts of both the Targhee and Beaverhead National Forests. Four contiguous parcels of land, totaling about 96,176 acres (38,922 hectares), make up the Wilderness Study Area (fig. 2). The first of these, encompassing about 46,126 acres (18,667 ha), is wholly in Montana (north of the Continental Divide) and consists of the U.S. Bureau of Land Mapagement's Centennial Mountains Instant Study Area. The second area, known as Management Unit 1 of the Centennial Planning Unit of the Targhee National Forest, consists of some 38,750 acres (15,682 ha) within Idaho (south of the Continental Divide). The third and fourth parcels include about 11,300 acres (4,573 ha) of National Forest land which cover the Mt. Jefferson and Sawtell Peak areas in the eastern part of the Centennial Mountains. Both are Forest Service Further Planning roadless areas (Unit 1-962 of the Beaverhead National Forest in Montana—the Mt. Jefferson area, and Unit 4-962 of the Targhee National Forest in Idaho—the Mt. Jefferson West area). Details of the geography and geology of the area are incorporated in a separate map prepared as an integral part of the mineral resource evaluation (Witkind, 1981). Only the more salient details of the geology described in that report are repeated here.

Idaho, Montana↗
USGS2005

Chapter K: Progress in the Evaluation of Alkali-Aggregate Reaction in Concrete Construction in the Pacific Northwest, United States and Canada

The supply of aggregates suitable for use in construction and maintenance of infrastructure in western North America is a continuing concern to the engineering and resources-management community. Steady population growth throughout the region has fueled demand for high-quality aggregates, in the face of rapid depletion of existing aggregate resources and slow and difficult permitting of new sources of traditional aggregate types. In addition to these challenges, the requirement for aggregates to meet various engineering standards continues to increase. In addition to their physical-mechanical properties, other performance characteristics of construction aggregates specifically depend on their mineralogy and texture. These properties can result in deleterious chemical reactions when aggregate is used in concrete mixes. When this chemical reaction-termed 'alkali-aggregate reaction' (AAR)-occurs, it can pose a major problem for concrete structures, reducing their service life and requiring expensive repair or even replacement of the concrete. AAR is thus to be avoided in order to promote the longevity of concrete structures and to ensure that public moneys invested in infrastructure are well spent. Because the AAR phenomenon is directly related to the mineral composition, texture, and petrogenesis of the rock particles that make up aggregates, an understanding of the relation between the geology and the performance of aggregates in concrete is important. In the Pacific Northwest, some aggregates have a moderate to high AAR potential, but many others have no or only a low AAR potential. Overall, AAR is not as widespread or serious a problem in the Pacific Northwest as in other regions of North America. The identification of reactive aggregates in the Pacific Northwest and the accurate prediction of their behavior in concrete continue to present challenges for the assessment and management of geologic resources to the owners and operators of pits and quarries and to the users of the concrete aggregates mined from these deposits. This situation is complicated by the length of time typically required for AAR to become noticeable in concrete construction in the Pacific Northwest, commonly on such a scale that other deterioration mechanisms may have masked the effects of AAR. Distinguishing between the effects of AAR and those related to other problems in concrete is important for understanding the nature and severity of AAR throughout the Pacific Northwest. Furthermore, developing an understanding of the extent of the problem will assist efforts to maximize the intelligent and stewardly use of aggregate resources in the Pacific Northwest. This chapter illustrates the current 'state of the art' of AAR studies in the Pacific Northwest, a region with a common geologic heritage as well as many distinct geologic elements. The optimal use of aggregates in the construction of concrete structures that will achieve their design life is possible through an understanding of the engineering and geologic properties of these aggregates and of their geologic setting.

Bulletin↗
USGS2003

Ferricrete, manganocrete, and bog iron occurrences with selected sedge bogs and active iron bogs and springs in the upper Animas River watershed, San Juan County, Colorado

During 1996 to 2000, the Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, Environmental Protection Agency, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) developed a coordinated strategy to (1) study the environmental effects of historical mining on Federal lands, and (2) remediate contaminated sites that have the greatest impact on water quality and ecosystem health. This dataset provides information that contributes to these overall objectives and is part of the USGS Abandoned Mine Lands Initiative. Data presented here represent ferricrete occurrences and selected iron bogs and springs in the upper Animas River watershed in San Juan County near Silverton, Colorado. Ferricretes (stratified iron and manganese oxyhydroxide-cemented sedimentary deposits) are one indicator of the geochemical baseline conditions as well as the effect that weathering of mineralized rocks had on water quality in the Animas River watershed prior to mining. Logs and wood fragments preserved in several ferricretes in the upper Animas River watershed, collected primarily along streams, yield radiocarbon ages of modern to 9,580 years B.P. (P.L. Verplanck, D.B. Yager, and S.E. Church, work in progress). The presence of ferricrete deposits along the current stream courses indicates that climate and physiography of the Animas River watershed have been relatively constant throughout the Holocene and that weathering processes have been ongoing for thousands of years prior to historical mining activities. Thus, by knowing where ferricrete is preserved in the watershed today, land-management agencies have an indication of (1) where metal precipitation from weathering of altered rocks has occurred in the past, and (2) where this process is ongoing and may confound remediation efforts. These data are included as two coverages-a ferricrete coverage and a bogs and springs coverage. The coverages are included in ArcInfo shapefile and ArcInfo interchange file format.

Colorado↗
USGS1999

The USGS Abandoned Mine Lands Initiative: Protecting and restoring the environment near abandoned mine lands

The Abandoned Mine Lands (AML) Initiative is part of a larger strategy of the U.S. Department of the Interior and the U.S. Department of Agriculture to clean up Federal lands contaminated by abandoned mines. Thousands of abandond hard-rock metal mines (such as gold, copper, lead, and zinc) have left a dual legacy across the Western United States. They reflect the historic development of the west, yet at the same time represent a possible threat to human health and local ecosystems. Abandoned Mine Lands (AML) are areas adjacent to or affected by abandoned mines. AML's often contain unmined mineral deposits, mine dumps (the ore and rock removed to get to the ore deposits), and tailings (the material left over from the ore processing) that contaminate the surrounding watershed and ecosystem. For example, streams near AML's can contain metals and (or) be so acidic that fish and aquatic insects cannot live in them. Many of these abandoned hard-rock mines are located on or adjacent to public lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, and U.S. Forest Service. These federal land management agencies and the USGS are committed to mitigating the adverse effects that AML's can have on water quality and stream habitats. The USGS AML Initiative began in 1997 and will continue through 2001 in two pilot watersheds - the Boulder River basin in southwestern Montana and the upper Animas River basin in southwestern Colorado. The USGS is providing a wide range of scientific expertise to help land managers minimize and, where possible, eliminate the adverse environmental effects of AML's. USGS ecologists, geologists, water quality experts, hydrologists, geochemists, and mapping and digital data collection experts are collaborating to provide the scientific knowledge needed for an effective cleanup of AML's.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New↗
USGS2016

Monitoring and research on the Bi-State Distinct Population Segment of greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ) in the Pine Nut Mountains, California and Nevada—Study progress report, 2011–15

The Bi-State distinct population segment (DPS) of greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ) that occurs along the Nevada–California border was proposed for listing as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) in October 2013. However, in April 2015, the FWS determined that the Bi-State DPS no longer required protection under the ESA and withdrew the proposed rule to list the Bi-State DPS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2015). The Bi-State DPS occupies portions of Alpine, Mono, and Inyo Counties in California, and Douglas, Esmeralda, Lyon, Carson City, and Mineral Counties in Nevada. Unique threats facing this population include geographic isolation, expansion of single-leaf pinyon ( Pinus monophylla ) and Utah juniper ( Juniperus osteosperma ), anthropogenic activities, and recent changes in predator communities. Estimating population vital rates, identifying seasonal habitat, quantifying threats, and identifying movement patterns are important first steps in developing effective sage-grouse management and conservation plans. During 2011–15, we radio- and Global Positioning System (GPS)-marked (2012–14 only) 44, 47, 17, 9, and 3 sage-grouse, respectively, for a total of 120, in the Pine Nut Mountains Population Management Unit (PMU). No change in lek attendance was detected at Mill Canyon (maximum=18 males) between 2011 and 2012; however, 1 male was observed in 2014 and no males were observed in 2013 and 2015. Males were observed near Bald Mountain in 2013, making it the first year this lek was observed to be active during the study period. Males were observed at a new site in the Buckskin Range in 2014 during trapping efforts and again observed during surveys in 2015. Findings indicate that pinyon-juniper is avoided by sage-grouse during every life stage. Nesting females selected increased sagebrush cover, sagebrush height, and understory horizontal cover, and brood-rearing females selected similar areas, but also preferred increased perennial forb abundance. Using maximum likelihood estimation, nest survival for the Pine Nut Mountains PMU during 2011–14 was 23.8 percent (95-percent confidence interval [CI]=0.3–40.6 percent) and appeared lower in comparison to the average 42 percent nest success for sage-grouse range-wide. Brood survival for 50-day brood-rearing phase in the Pine Nut Mountains PMU during 2011–14 was 53.8 percent (95-percent CI=30.0–73.4 percent). Adult survival during 2011–15 was 67.4 percent (95-percent CI=56.1–76.5 percent). During 2011–14, 696 raptor/raven surveys were completed and results indicate a greater number of raven detections ( n =464) in the Pine Nut Mountains PMU than at other study areas in Nevada. These data will be used to develop a predator index. We conducted a more minimal monitoring effort of sage-grouse populations during the 2015 field season, which included trapping efforts, general telemetry, brood monitoring, and GPS monitoring. Nest monitoring, microhabitat sampling, and raptor/raven surveys were not conducted in the 2015 season. Deployment of GPS transmitters has expanded our knowledge of movement corridors and fine-scale movement patterns by sage-grouse in the Pine Nut Mountains PMU. Movement corridors between seasonal habitats were identified with one sage-grouse traveling greater than 100 kilometers south to the Bodie Mountains in California for the winter season. The use of GPS technology to monitor movements in conjunction with intensive field efforts will be important in developing habitat models and maps for the Pine Nut Mountains PMU.

California, Nevada↗
USGS1987

Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska, Coastal Plain Resource Assessment: Report and recommendation to the Congress of the United States and final legislative environmental impact statement

The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, in the northeastern corner of Alaska, was first established as the Arctic National Wildlife Range by Public Land Order 2214 in 1960, for the purpose of preserving unique wildlife, wilderness, and recreational values. The original 8.9-millionacre Range was withdrawn from all forms of appropriation under the public land laws, including mining laws but not including mineral leasing laws. This order culminated extensive efforts begun more than a decade earlier to preserve this unique part of Alaska. The following report analyzes the potential environmental consequences of five management alternatives for the coastal plain, ranging from opening for lease of the entire area for oil and gas development, to wilderness designation. A legislative environmental impact statement has been integrated into the report.

Alaska↗
USGS2009

Ecology of Greater Sage-Grouse in the Bi-State Planning Area Final Report, September 2007

Conservation efforts for greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus), hereafter sage-grouse, are underway across the range of this species. Over 70 local working groups have been established and are implementing on-the-ground sage-grouse oriented conservation projects. Early on in this process, the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) recognized the need to join in these efforts and received funding from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) under the Candidate Species Conservation Program to help develop a species conservation plan for sage-grouse in the Mono County area. This conservation plan covers portions of Alpine, Mono, and Inyo counties in California and Douglas, Esmeralda, Lyon, and Mineral counties in Nevada. A concurrent effort underway through the Nevada Governor's Sage-grouse Conservation Team established Local Area Working Groups across Nevada and eastern California. The Mono County populations of sage-grouse were encompassed by the Bi-State Local Planning Area, which was comprised of six population management units (PMUs). The state agencies from California (CDFG) and Nevada (Nevada Department of Wildlife; NDOW) responsible for the management of sage-grouse agreed to utilize the process that had begun with the Nevada Governor's Team in order to develop local plans for conservation planning and implementation. Resources from the USFWS were applied to several objectives in support of the development of the Bi-State Local Area Sage-grouse Conservation Plan through a grant to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Objectives included: (1) participate in the development of the Bi-State Conservation Plan, (2) compile and synthesize existing sage-grouse data, (3) document seasonal movements of sage-grouse, (4) identify habitats critical to sage-grouse, (5) determine survival rates and identify causal factors of mortality, (6) determine nest success and brood success of sage-grouse, and (7) identify sage-grouse lek sites. Progress reports completed in 2004 and 2005 addressed each of the specific objectives and this final report focuses on the biological information gathered in support of local conservation efforts. Participation in the development of the Bi-State Local Area Conservation Plan was accomplished on multiple scales. Beginning in the fall of 2002, USGS personnel began participating in meetings of local stakeholders involved in the development of a sage-grouse conservation plan for the Bi-State planning area. This included attendance at numerous local PMU group meetings and field trips as well as participating on the technical advisory committee (TAC) for the Bi-State group. Whenever appropriate, ongoing results and findings regarding sage-grouse ecology in the local area were incorporated into these working group meetings. In addition, the USGS partnered with CDFG to help reorganize one of the local PMU groups (South Mono) and edited that portion of the Bi-State plan. The USGS also worked closely with CDFG to draft a description of the state of knowledge for sage-grouse genetic information for inclusion in the Bi-State Conservation Plan. The first edition of the Bi-State Conservation Plan for Greater Sage-Grouse was completed in June 2004 (Bi-State Sage-grouse Conservation Team 2004). This report is organized primarily by PMU to facilitate the incorporation of these research findings into the individual PMU plans that compose the Bi-State plan. Information presented in this report was derived from over 7,000 radio-telemetry locations obtained on 145 individual sage-grouse during a three year period (2003-2005). In addition, we collected detailed vegetation measurements at over 590 habitat sampling plots within the study area including canopy cover, shrubs, forbs, and grasses diversity. Vegetation data collection focused on sage-grouse nests, and brood-use areas. Additionally we collected data at random sites to examine sage-grouse habitat relationships within the study area. The majori

Open-File Report↗
USGS2011

Geologic map of Big Bend National Park, Texas

The purpose of this map is to provide the National Park Service and the public with an updated digital geologic map of Big Bend National Park (BBNP). The geologic map report of Maxwell and others (1967) provides a fully comprehensive account of the important volcanic, structural, geomorphological, and paleontological features that define BBNP. However, the map is on a geographically distorted planimetric base and lacks topography, which has caused difficulty in conducting GIS-based data analyses and georeferencing the many geologic features investigated and depicted on the map. In addition, the map is outdated, excluding significant data from numerous studies that have been carried out since its publication more than 40 years ago. This report includes a modern digital geologic map that can be utilized with standard GIS applications to aid BBNP researchers in geologic data analysis, natural resource and ecosystem management, monitoring, assessment, inventory activities, and educational and recreational uses. The digital map incorporates new data, many revisions, and greater detail than the original map. Although some geologic issues remain unresolved for BBNP, the updated map serves as a foundation for addressing those issues. Funding for the Big Bend National Park geologic map was provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program and the National Park Service. The Big Bend mapping project was administered by staff in the USGS Geology and Environmental Change Science Center, Denver, Colo. Members of the USGS Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center completed investigations in parallel with the geologic mapping project. Results of these investigations addressed some significant current issues in BBNP and the U.S.-Mexico border region, including contaminants and human health, ecosystems, and water resources. Funding for the high-resolution aeromagnetic survey in BBNP, and associated data analyses and interpretation, was from the USGS Crustal Geophysics and Geochemistry Science Center. Mapping contributed from university professors and students was mostly funded by independent sources, including academic institutions, private industry, and other agencies.

Texas↗
USGS2013

Challenge theme 4: People in the Borderlands: Chapter 6 in United States-Mexican Borderlands: Facing tomorrow's challenges through USGS science

The management of shared resources in the United States–Mexican border region requires cooperation from the people of both countries to assess and understand their relation to the environment. Society is dependent on the long-term healthy functioning of ecosystems and their ability to supply food and raw materials. Likewise, resources and services obtained from nature could be used efficiently within the society. A more equitable distribution of costs and benefits related to goods and services can lead to fewer tensions and a higher quality of life for all the people in the Borderlands. Urban development, background contamination from mineral ore deposits, irrigation, sewage effluent, and even global climate change all have the potential to alter the stability of the fragile systems in the Borderlands (Brady and others, 2001, 2002; Norman, 2007, 2010; Gu and others, 2008; Norman, Gray, and others, 2008; Norman, Hirsch, and Ward, 2008; Norman, Callegary, and others, 2010; Norman, Huth, and others, 2010; Norman, Levick, and others, 2010; Norman, Tallent-Halsell, and others, 2010; Norman, Villarreal, and others 2012). Social efficiency means that because resources should be used where they are needed most, they should be distributed proportionally among human societies and individuals (Azar and others, 1996). Despite the critical role natural resources play in maintaining human and environmental health, current knowledge of the manner in which natural and human-caused forces interact to limit these resources—including their quality and quantity (such as through spatiotemporal changes in precipitation, evapotranspiration, pumping of groundwater, and release of contaminants)—is inadequate. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is trying to understand the relation between changing landscapes, changing demographics, and a changing climate in the Borderlands while the environmental, economic, and societal issues continue to be intertwined between the two nations.

United States-Mexico Borderlands↗
USGS2007

Integrated geoscience studies in the Greater Yellowstone Area - Volcanic, tectonic, and hydrothermal processes in the Yellowstone geoecosystem

Yellowstone National Park, rimmed by a crescent of older mountainous terrain, has at its core the Quaternary Yellowstone Plateau, an undulating landscape shaped by forces of volcanism, tectonism, and later glaciation. Its spectacular hydrothermal systems cap this landscape. From 1997 through 2003, the United States Geological Survey Mineral Resources Program conducted a multidisciplinary project of Yellowstone National Park entitled Integrated Geoscience Studies of the Greater Yellowstone Area, building on a 130-year foundation of extensive field studies (including the Hayden survey of 1871, the Hague surveys of the 1880s through 1896, the studies of Iddings, Allen, and Day during the 1920s, and NASA-supported studies starting in the 1970s—now summarized in USGS Professional Paper 729 A through G) in this geologically dynamic terrain. The project applied a broad range of scientific disciplines and state-of-the-art technologies targeted to improve stewardship of the unique natural resources of Yellowstone and enable the National Park Service to effectively manage resources, protect park visitors from geologic hazards, and better educate the public on geologic processes and resources. This project combined a variety of data sets in characterizing the surficial and subsurface chemistry, mineralogy, geology, geophysics, and hydrothermal systems in various parts of the park. The sixteen chapters presented herein in USGS Professional Paper 1717, Integrated Geoscience Studies in the Greater Yellowstone Area—Volcanic, Tectonic, and Hydrothermal Processes in the Yellowstone Geoecosystem , can be divided into four major topical areas: (1) geologic studies, (2) Yellowstone Lake studies, (3) geochemical studies, and (4) geophysical studies. The geologic studies include a paper by Ken Pierce and others on the influence of the Yellowstone hotspot on landscape formation, the ecological effects of the hotspot, and the human experience and human geography of the greater Yellowstone ecosystem as influenced by the Yellowstone hotspot. Another paper by Paul Carrara describes the recent movement of a large landslide block dated by tree-ring analyses in the Tower Falls area. The section under Yellowstone Lake studies begins with a classic paper by J. David Love and others on ancestral Lake Yellowstone. Other papers in this section include results and interpretation of the high-resolution bathymetric, seismic reflection, and submersible studies by Lisa Morgan and others. Ken Pierce and others describe results from their studies of shorelines along Yellowstone Lake and their interpretation of inflation-deflation cycles, tilting, and faulting in the Yellowstone caldera. The influence of sublacustrine hydrothermal vent fluids on the geochemistry of Yellowstone Lake is described by Laurie Balistrieri and others. In Pat Shanks and others’ chapter, hydrothermal reactions, stable-isotope systematics, sinter deposition, and spire formation are related to the geochemistry of sublacustrine hydrothermal deposits in Yellowstone Lake. The geochemical studies section considers park-wide geochemical systems in Yellowstone National Park. In Bob Rye and Alfred Truesdell’s paper, the question of recharge to the deep thermal reservoir underlying the geysers and hot springs of Yellowstone National Park is discussed. Irving Friedman and Dan Norton report on the chloride flux emissions from Yellowstone in their paper questioning whether Yellowstone is losing its steam. Wildlife issues as addressed by examining trace-element and stable-isotope geochemistry are discussed in a chapter by Maurice Chaffee and others. In another chapter by Chaffee and others, natural and anthropogenic anomalies and their potential impact on the environment using geochemistry is reported. Pam Gemery-Hill and others present geochemical data for selected rivers, lake waters, hydrothermal vents, and subaerial geysers for the time interval of 1996–2004. The life cycle of gold deposits near the northeast corner of the park is discussed by Brad Van Gosen. Under the geophysical studies segment, Ray Kokaly and others use AVIRIS (Airborne Visible and Infrared Spectroscopy) data to map vegetation cover and microbial communities in Yellowstone National Park. Eric Livo and others report their results using AVIRIS data on hydrothermally altered rock and hot-spring deposits. In his final paper following a half century of scientific research, Irving Friedman presents data on monitoring changes in geothermal activity at Norris Geyser Basin using satellite telemetry. These papers summarize a near-decade-long effort by the USGS from the late 1990s to mid-2000s. In 2001, the USGS in cooperation with the National Park Service (Yellowstone National Park) and the University of Utah established the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory, the 5th volcano observatory in the United States.

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming↗
USGS2020

Research is needed to inform environmental management of hydrothermally inactive and extinct polymetallic sulfide (PMS) deposits

Polymetallic sulfide (PMS) deposits produced at hydrothermal vents in the deep sea are of potential interest to miners. Hydrothermally active sulfide ecosystems are valued for the extraordinary chemosynthetic communities that they support. Many countries, including Canada, Portugal, and the United States, protect vent ecosystems in their Exclusive Economic Zones. When hydrothermal activity ceases temporarily (dormancy) or permanently (extinction), the habitat and associated ecosystem change dramatically. Until recently, so-called “inactive sulfide” habitats, either dormant or extinct, received little attention from biologists. However, the need for environmental management of deep-sea mining places new imperatives for building scientific understanding of the structure and function of inactive PMS deposits. This paper calls for actions of the scientific community and the emergent seabed mining industry to i) undertake fundamental ecological descriptions and study of ecosystem functions and services associated with hydrothermally inactive PMS deposits, ii) evaluate potential environmental risks to ecosystems of inactive PMS deposits through research, and iii) identify environmental management needs that may enable mining of inactive PMS deposits. Mining of some extinct PMS deposits may have reduced environmental risk compared to other seabed mining activities, but this must be validated through scientific research on a case-by-case basis.

Marine Policy↗
USGS2012

Using hydrogeology to identify the source of groundwater to Montezuma Well, a natural spring in central Arizona: part 1

Montezuma Well is a natural spring located within a “sinkhole” in the desert environment of the Verde Valley in Central Arizona. It is managed by the National Park Service as part of Montezuma Castle National Monument. Because of increasing development of groundwater in the area, this research was undertaken to better understand the sources of groundwater to Montezuma Well. The use of well logs and geophysics provides details on the geology in the area around Montezuma Well. This includes characterizing the extent and position of a basalt dike that intruded a deep fracture zone. This low permeability barrier forces groundwater to the surface at the Montezuma Well “pool” with sufficient velocity to entrain sand-sized particles from underlying bedrock. Permeable fractures along and above the basalt dike provide conduits that carry deep sourced carbon dioxide to the surface, which can dissolve carbonate minerals along the transport path in response to the added carbon dioxide. At the ground surface, CO 2 degasses, depositing travertine. Geologic cross sections, rock geochemistry, and semi-quantitative groundwater flow modeling provide a hydrogeologic framework that indicates groundwater flow through a karstic limestone at depth (Redwall Limestone) as the most significant source of groundwater to Montezuma Well. Additional groundwater flow from the overlying formations (Verde Formation and Permian Sandstones) is a possibility, but significant flow from these units is not indicated.

Arizona↗
USGS2018

Beyond traditional ecological restoration on the Colorado Plateau

The Colorado Plateau is one of North America's five major deserts, encompassing 340,000 km 2 of the western U.S., and offering many opportunities for restoration relevant to researchers and land managers in drylands around the globe. The Colorado Plateau is comprised of vast tracts of public land managed by local, state, and federal agencies that oversee a wide range of activities (e.g., mineral and energy extraction, livestock grazing, and recreation). About 75% of the Plateau is managed by federal and tribal agencies and tens of millions of people visit the Plateau's public lands each year. However, even in the face of this diverse use, our knowledge of effective ways to restore Plateau ecosystems remains relatively poor. Further, the multiple agencies on the Plateau have mandates that differ greatly in allowable practices, restoration needs, and desired outcomes. The Colorado Plateau is also expected to undergo ecosystem shifts in the face of climate change, further complicating management decisions and potentially limiting some options while creating others. Here we explore the current state of Colorado Plateau restoration science and underscore key challenges and opportunities for improving our capacity to maintain the myriad of services provided by these desert ecosystems. We highlight past research efforts and future needs related to restoration concepts, including consideration and design of novel ecosystems, mitigation for and adaptation to climate change, use of genetically diverse seed adapted for current and future conditions, and the value of strong multi‐agency and stakeholder collaborations in restoring systems on the Colorado Plateau and beyond.

Colorado Plateau↗