Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Natural Resources and Environmental Issues”

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

Ecoregional-scale monitoring within conservation areas, in a rapidly changing climate

Long-term monitoring of ecological systems can prove invaluable for resource management and conservation. Such monitoring can: (1) detect instances of long-term trend (either improvement or deterioration) in monitored resources, thus providing an early-warning indication of system change to resource managers; (2) inform management decisions and help assess the effects of management actions, as well as anthropogenic and natural disturbances; and (3) provide the grist for supplemental research on mechanisms of system dynamics and cause-effect relationships (Fancy et al., 2009). Such monitoring additionally provides a snapshot of the status of monitored resources during each sampling cycle, and helps assess whether legal standards and regulations are being met. Until the last 1-2 decades, tracking and understanding changes in condition of natural resources across broad spatial extents have been infrequently attempted. Several factors, however, are facilitating the achievement of such broad-scale investigation and monitoring. These include increasing awareness of the importance of landscape context, greater prevalence of regional and global environmental stressors, and the rise of landscape-scale programs designed to manage and monitor biological systems. Such programs include the US Forest Service's Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) Program (Moser et al., 2008), Canada's National Forest Inventory, the 3Q Programme for monitoring agricultural landscapes of Norway (Dramstad et al., 2002), and the emerging (US) Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (USDOI Secretarial Order 3289, 2009; Anonymous, 2011). This Special Section explores the underlying design considerations, as well as many pragmatic aspects associated with program implementation and interpretation of results from broad-scale monitoring systems, particularly within the constraints of high-latitude contexts (e.g., low road density, short field season, dramatic fluctuations in temperature). Although Alaska is the focus of most papers in this Special Section, we posit that many of the issues that characterize the remote, relatively undisturbed ecosystems of high northern latitudes are widespread and thus applicable to natural-resource management and conservation across northern portions of the Holarctic ecozone and indeed anywhere broad-scale monitoring is contemplated.

Biological Conservation↗

National Wildlife Refuge System: Ecological context and integrity

The Refuge Improvement Act of 1997 established a statutory mission and management standards for the National Wildlife Refuge system. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service subsequently issued a policy for ensuring the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the system. This policy requires understanding the management objectives of each refuge in a local, regional, and national context. An assessment of the refuge system in a national and regional context reveals that refuges are typically smaller than many conservation holdings and are unevenly distributed across the conterminous U.S. Western rangelands, coastal wetlands, and northern grasslands; wetlands are the best-represented ecosystems, while temperate forests have the poorest representation. In contrast to other agency holdings or management designations in the national protected areas network (e.g., national parks, national forests, wilderness areas), refuges tend to occupy sites at lower elevations and that have higher productivity and soil quality. This difference points to the important contribution of the refuges in providing much needed ecological balance within the national protected areas network. However, the ecological integrity of the refuge system is challenged by the proximity of individual refuges to development. Overall, the refuges are becoming islands in a landscape matrix of urban and agricultural development. This creates future challenges for meeting management objectives to ensure the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the system. If the policy to ensure biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the refuge system is to be successful, it may be more important to address issues about what happens on adjacent lands than uses within refuges.

Natural Resources Journal↗

Lessons learned from development of natural capital accounts in the United States and European Union

The United States and European Union (EU) face common challenges in managing natural capital and balancing conservation and resource use with consumption of other forms of capital. This paper synthesizes findings from 11 individual application papers from a special issue of Ecosystem Services on natural capital accounting (NCA) and their application to the public and private sectors in the EU and U.S. NCA is inherently a data-integration centered exercise, aiming to draw new insights by realigning environmental and economic data into a consistent framework. Drawing primarily on papers from the special issue and other key NCA literature, we identify lessons learned and gaps remaining for NCA’s development and application to decision making. In doing so, we identify eight key similarities and three major differences in NCA development, status, and application between the U.S. and EU. NCA can be highly policy relevant: special issue papers address critical issues including agriculture, water, conservation/land-use planning, climate, and corporate decision making. In both the U.S. and EU, further application is needed to drive demand for the accounts’ production. Based on these experiences, the U.S. and EU can be important leaders in cross-sector, international collaboration toward next-generation environmental economic accounts that advance global NCA practice.

Ecosystem Services↗

A flexible conservation and connectivity tool to inform stream conservation prioritization

Healthy stream networks rely on diverse fish assemblages and the mobility of fish between habitats to maintain ecosystem structure and function. Anthropogenic structures that impede fish movement (e.g., roads, dams) disrupt life cycles of migratory fishes and isolate fish populations making them more sensitive to environmental stressors. Growing interest in barrier removal is driven by the recognition that restoring fish passage improves ecosystem health and resilience at multiple trophic levels, but identifying which streams should be reconnected and which barriers to remove remains an unresolved issue. Using the state of Missouri (USA) stream network, we developed an interactive decision support tool designed to help natural resource managers identify a shortlist of stream reaches to prioritize for reconnection, barrier removal, and habitat restoration. Our aquatic connectivity decision support tool, which we call AquaConn, is aimed at managers seeking to improve connectivity within and between existing conservation areas, particularly in wadeable streams. AquaConn provides a flexible platform that allows managers to consider entire assemblages of fish or individual species across local or more regional spatial scales. While AquaConn ( https://bit.ly/4kQgXK8 ) was built for the state of Missouri, our approach and framework can be replicated in any geographical region that has adequate fish assemblage data.

Missouri↗

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↗

Research, conservation, and collaboration: The role of visiting scientists in developing countries

As awareness of environmental problems and the need to protect our natural resources or use them wisely has grown, scientists have become increasingly interested in conservation. Some individuals are involved in conservation-related activities through research or teaching, but most of us participate only as citizens concerned about the world in which we live. Often, we decline to take an active role in conservation issues because we think that "it will take too much time away from our science," or that it is "too much trouble." Both perspectives, I think, are inaccurate. Sometimes investigators fail to participate because they are ignorant of the ways in which scientists (or scientific organizations) interface with conservation - in other words, of how one goes about getting personally involved. Whatever the reason, this lack of involvement is unfortunate, because scientists, and especially "whole organism" biologists (including ornithologists), can make unique contributions to conservation programs, as scientists , without a significant increase in effort or any change in the quality of their work. At the same time, they reap both professional and personal rewards.

The Auk↗

Large reservoirs: Chapter 17

Large impoundments, defined as those with surface area of 200 ha or greater, are relatively new aquatic ecosystems in the global landscape. They represent important economic and environmental resources that provide benefits such as flood control, hydropower generation, navigation, water supply, commercial and recreational fisheries, and various other recreational and esthetic values. Construction of large impoundments was initially driven by economic needs, and ecological consequences received little consideration. However, in recent decades environmental issues have come to the forefront. In the closing decades of the 20th century societal values began to shift, especially in the developed world. Society is no longer willing to accept environmental damage as an inevitable consequence of human development, and it is now recognized that continued environmental degradation is unsustainable. Consequently, construction of large reservoirs has virtually stopped in North America. Nevertheless, in other parts of the world construction of large reservoirs continues. The emergence of systematic reservoir management in the early 20th century was guided by concepts developed for natural lakes (Miranda 1996). However, we now recognize that reservoirs are different and that reservoirs are not independent aquatic systems inasmuch as they are connected to upstream rivers and streams, the downstream river, other reservoirs in the basin, and the watershed. Reservoir systems exhibit longitudinal patterns both within and among reservoirs. Reservoirs are typically arranged sequentially as elements of an interacting network, filter water collected throughout their watersheds, and form a mosaic of predictable patterns. Traditional approaches to fisheries management such as stocking, regulating harvest, and in-lake habitat management do not always produce desired effects in reservoirs. As a result, managers may expend resources with little benefit to either fish or fishing. Some locally expressed effects, such as turbidity and water quality, zooplankton density and size composition, or fish growth rates and assemblage composition, are the upshot of large-scale factors operating outside reservoirs and not under the direct control of reservoir managers. Realistically, abiotic and biotic conditions in reservoirs are shaped by factors working inside and outside reservoirs, with the relative importance of external factors differing among reservoirs. With this perspective, large reservoirs are viewed from a habitat standpoint within the framework of a conceptual model in which individual reservoir characteristics are influenced by both local- and landscape-scale factors (Figure 17.1). In the sections that follow, how each element of this hierarchical model influences habitat and fish assemblages in reservoirs is considered. Important in-reservoir habitat issues and reservoirs as part of larger systems, where reservoir management requires looking for real solutions outside individual reservoirs are described.

Book chapter↗

Geography for a Changing World - A science strategy for the geographic research of the U.S. Geological Survey, 2005-2015

This report presents a science strategy for the geographic research of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the years 2005-2015. The common thread running through the vision, mission, and science goals presented in the plan is that USGS geographers will provide national leadership to understand coupled human-environmental systems in the face of land change and will deliver pertinent information to decisionmakers on the vulnerability and resilience of these systems. We define land change science as the study of the human and environment dynamics that give rise to changed land use, cover, and surface form. A number of realities shape the strategic context of this plan: The Department of Interior Strategic Plan focuses on meeting society’s resource needs and sustaining the Nation’s life support systems, underscoring the importance of characterizing and understanding coupled human-environmental systems. In redefining its mission in the mid-1990s, the USGS envisions itself as an integrated natural science and information agency. The USGS will assume a national leadership role in the use of science to develop knowledge about the web of relations that couple biophysical and human systems and translate this knowledge into unbiased, reliable information that meets important societal information needs. The following trends will influence USGS geography-oriented science activities over the next decade. Most of the emerging earth science issues that the USGS will address are geographic phenomena. A growing international concern for aligning society’s development activities with environmental limits has led to an articulation of a science agenda associated with global environmental change, vulnerability, and resilience. Earth science investigations have evolved toward the study of very large areas, and the resulting huge volumes of data are challenging to manage and understand. Finally, scientists and the public face the challenge of gaining intelligent insights about geographic and environmental processes from these data, with the ultimate goal of guiding resource-management decisions. The first four science goals in the plan support understanding the human and environmental dynamics of land change. Each science goal has an associated set of strategic actions to achieve the goal. These goals and actions are consistent with national science priorities and the Department of Interior and USGS missions, take advantage of existing expertise, and lead to the strengthening of critical geographic research capacities that do not exist in other USGS disciplines.

Circular↗

U.S. Geological Survey Activities Related to American Indians and Alaska Natives Fiscal Year 2003

Introduction Information is a resource for Native American governments, communities, organizations, and people. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) provides technical expertise, reports, and other impartial information sources that benefit Native Americans interested in subsistence issues, water, resources and land use, and the health of many parts of the environment. Native decisions based in USGS data and analyses support the goals of Native self-sufficiency, economic development, and conservation. The USGS works in cooperation with American Indian and Alaska Native governments, conducting research on: water energy and mineral resources; animals and plants of environmental, economic, or subsistence importance; and natural hazards. Digital data on cartography, energy and mineral resources, streamflow, biota, and other topics are available to American Indian and Alaska Native individuals and institutions. The USGS also recognizes the need to learn from and share knowledge with Native peoples. This report describes most of the activities that the USGS conducted with American Indian and Alaska Native governments, educational institutions, and individuals during Federal fiscal year (FY) 2003. Some of these USGS activities were conducted cooperatively with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) or other Federal entities. Others were collaborations with Tribes, Tribal organizations, and professional societies.

Report↗

Current research in land, water, and agroecosystems: ASABE journals 2017 year in review

This article highlights current research into land and water resources, agroecosystems, and agricultural production systems published by the Natural Resources and Environmental Systems (NRES) community of ASABE journals (Transactions of the ASABE and Applied Engineering in Agriculture) in 2017. This article reviews the context, scope, and key results of the published articles and perhaps more importantly recommends areas for increased research attention. Experimental and modeling advances were described in hydrology, agroecosystems, climate-change effects, soil erosion, irrigation, drainage, forest resources, livestock systems, natural treatment systems, international water issues, and water quality topic areas. Three special collections were published (International Watershed Technology, Crop Modeling to Optimize Water Use, and Advances in Drainage). Other focal areas included 14 articles relating to livestock waste management, 13 concerning irrigated agricultural systems, 8 addressing climate change effects on land and water resources, and 16 on various aspects of soil erosion measurement and modeling. Building on the articles reviewed from 2017 and toward a vision of future agroecosystems research, the NRES community of ASABE journals strives to grow its role in making new knowledge accessible to sustain agricultural and natural systems in a changing world. In this vane, recommendations for future research direction are discussed with an emphasis on increased application of remote sensing data to agroecosystems research, improved assessment of agroecosystem resiliency and vulnerability to land and climate change, development of integrated models of agroecosystem services, meeting stubborn water management challenges in agricultural production systems, and focusing on publishing fully reproducible model results.

Transactions of the ASABE↗

Environmental systems and management activities on the Kennedy Space Center, Merritt Island, Florida: results of a modeling workshop

In the early 1960's, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) began purchasing 140,000 acres on Merritt Island, Florida, in order to develop a center for space exploration. Most of this land was acquired to provide a safety and security buffer around NASA facilities. NASA, as the managing agency for the Kennedy Space Center (KSC), is responsible for preventing or controlling environmental pollution from the Federal facilities and activities at the Space Center and is committed to use all practicable means to protect and enhance the quality of the surrounding environment. The Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge was established in 1963 when management authority for undeveloped lands at KSC was transferred to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In addition to manage for 11 Federally-listed threatened and endangered species and other resident and migratory fish and wildlife populations, the Refuge has comanagement responsibility for 19,000 acres of mosquito control impoundments and 2,500 acres of citrus groves. The Canaveral National Seashore was developed in 1975 when management of a portion of the coastal lands was transferred from NASA to the National Park Service. This multiagency jurisdiction on Merritt Island has resulted in a complex management environment. The modeling workshop described in this report was conducted May 21-25, 1984, at the Kennedy Space Center to: (1) enhance communication among the agencies with management responsibilities on Merritt Island; (2) integrate available information concerning the development, management, and ecology of Merritt Island; and (3) identify key research and monitoring needs associated with the management and use of the island's resources. The workshop was structured around the formulation of a model that would simulate primary management and use activities on Merritt Island and their effects on upland, impoundment, and estuarine vegetation and associated wildlife. The simulation model is composed of four connected submodels. The Uplands submodel calculates changes in acres and structural components of vegetation communities resulting from succession, fire, facilities development, and shuttle launch depositions, as well as the quantity and quality of surface runoff and aquifer input to an impoundment and an estuary. The Impoundment submodel next determines water quality and quantity and changes in vegetation resulting from water level manipulation and prescribed burning. The Estuary submodel than determines water quality parameters and acres of seagrass beds. Finally, the Wildlife submodel calculates habitat suitability indices for key species of interest, based on vegetation conditions in the uplands and impoundments and on several hydrologic parameters. The model represents a hypothetical management unit with 2,500 acres of uplands, a 600-acre impoundment, and a 1,500-acre section of estuary. Two management scenarios were run to analyze model behavior. The scenarios differ in the frequency of shuttle launches and prescribed burning, the extent of facilities development, the amount of land disposed waste material applied, and the nature and timing of impoundment water level control. Early in a model development project, the process of building the model is usually of greater benefit than the model itself. The model building process stimulates interaction among agencies, assists in integrating existing information, and helps identify research needs. These benefits usually accrue even in the absence of real predictive power in the resulting model. Open communication occurs among the Federal, State, and local agencies involved with activities on Merritt Island and the agencies have a cooperative working relationship. The workshop provided an opportunity for all of these agencies to meet at one time and have focused discussions on the key environmental and multiagency resource management issues. The workshop framework helped to integrate information and assumptions from a number of disciplines and agencies. This integration occurred in the computer simulation model and among workshop participants as submodel linkages were developed and scenario results discussed. A number of research needs were identified at the workshop during the model building and testing exercises and associated discussions. These needs were based on the informed judgement of researchers and managers familiar with Merritt Island or similar areas, rather than on a comprehensive literature review of sensitivity analysis of the preliminary model developed at the workshop. Some of the needs can be addressed by interpreting the results of completed studies from similar geographic areas as they relate to Merritt Island, while other will require additional research studies on Merritt Island. Major research needs associated with the Upland submodel include behavior of the near-surface aquifer, factors limiting slash pine regeneration, frequency and effects of natural fire on various cover types, cumulative effects of shuttle launches, and fate in upland soils of nitrogen and phosphorous from land applied waste material. Key Impoundment submodel needs include documentation of vegetation changes in response to altered water depth, salinity, and nutrient concentrations and better specification of the functional characteristics of impoundments as chemical filters. Important information gaps identified in the Estuary submodel include a more complete analysis of factors contributing to phytoplankton abundance, evaluation of sources of turbidity other than phytoplankton, and identification and quantification of factors limiting seagrass distribution. Primary research needs associated with the Wildlife submodel include a survey of breeding habitat, production data, and harvest data for mottled ducks; data on the emigration and immigration of juvenile mullet (and other transient fish) in the impoundment; the contribution of various seagrasses to habitat requirements of sea trout; and the effects of dissolved oxygen on survival of juvenile sea trout. Ideally, the modeling workshop process is iterative in nature. Periods between workshops are used for research, data collection, and model refinement. Each workshop integrates information collected since the last workshop and produces a more credible model that is more useful in evaluating management alternatives. Participants felt that continued application of this process would help provide ongoing integration and communication among agencies and would allow each agency's planning and management activities to be viewed within the context of an overall assessment.

Report↗

Southeast Regional Assessment Project for the National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey

The Southeastern United States spans a broad range of physiographic settings and maintains exceptionally high levels of faunal diversity. Unfortunately, many of these ecosystems are increasingly under threat due to rapid human development, and management agencies are increasingly aware of the potential effects that climate change will have on these ecosystems. Natural resource managers and conservation planners can be effective at preserving ecosystems in the face of these stressors only if they can adapt current conservation efforts to increase the overall resilience of the system. Climate change, in particular, challenges many of the basic assumptions used by conservation planners and managers. Previous conservation planning efforts identified and prioritized areas for conservation based on the current environmental conditions, such as habitat quality, and assumed that conditions in conservation lands would be largely controlled by management actions (including no action). Climate change, however, will likely alter important system drivers (temperature, precipitation, and sea-level rise) and make it difficult, if not impossible, to maintain recent historic conditions in conservation lands into the future. Climate change will also influence the future conservation potential of non-conservation lands, further complicating conservation planning. Therefore, there is a need to develop and adapt effective conservation strategies to cope with the effects of climate and landscape change on future environmental conditions. Congress recognized this important issue and authorized the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center (NCCWSC; http://nccw.usgs.gov/) in the Fiscal Year 2008. The NCCWSC will produce science that will help resource management agencies anticipate and adapt to climate change impacts to fish, wildlife, and their habitats. With the release of Secretarial Order 3289 on September 14, 2009, the mandate of the NCCWSC was expanded to address climate change-related impacts on all Department of the Interior (DOI) resources. The NCCWSC will establish a network of eight DOI Regional Climate Science Centers (RCSCs) that will work with a variety of partners to provide natural resource managers with tools and information that will help them anticipate and adapt conservation planning and design for projected climate change. The forecasting products produced by the RCSCs will aid fish, wildlife, and land managers in designing suitable adaptive management approaches for their programs. The DOI also is developing Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs) as science and conservation action partnerships at subregional scales. The USGS is working with the Southeast Region of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to develop science collaboration between the future Southeast RCSC and future LCCs. The NCCWSC Southeast Regional Assessment Project (SERAP) will begin to develop regional downscaled climate models, land cover change models, regional ecological models, regional watershed models, and other science tools. Models and data produced by SERAP will be used in a collaborative process between the USGS, the FWS (LCCs), State and federal partners, nongovernmental organizations, and academia to produce science at appropriate scales to answer resource management questions. The SERAP will produce an assessment of climate change, and impacts on land cover, ecosystems, and priority species in the region. The predictive tools developed by the SERAP project team will allow end users to better understand potential impacts of climate change and sea level rise on terrestrial and aquatic populations in the Southeastern United States. The SERAP capitalizes on the integration of five existing projects: (1) the Multi-State Conservation Grants Program project "Designing Sustainable Landscapes," (2) the USGS multidisciplinary Science Thrust project "Water Availability for Ecological Needs," (3) the USGS Southeast Pilot Project "Climate Change in the Southeastern U.S. and its Impacts on Bird Distributions and Habitats," (4) a sea-level rise impacts study envisioned jointly with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and (5) two USGS sea-level rise impact assessment projects that address inundation hazards and provide probabilistic forecasts of coastal geomorphic change. The SERAP will expand on these existing projects and include the following tasks, which were initiated in summer 2009: * Regionally downscaled probabilistic climate-change projections * Integrated coastal assessment * Integrated terrestrial assessment * Multi-resolution assessment of potential climate change effects on biological resources: aquatic and hydrologic dynamics * Optimal conservation strategies to cope with climate change The SERAP seeks to formally integrate these tasks to aid conservation planning and design so that ecosystem management decisions can be optimized for providing desirable outcomes across a range of species and environments. The following chapters detail SERAP's efforts in providing a suite of regional climate, watershed, and landscape-change analyses and develop the interdisciplinary framework required for the biological planning phases of adaptive management and strategic conservation. The planning phase will include the identification of conservation alternatives, development of predictive models and decision support tools, and development of a template to address similar challenges and goals in other regions. The project teams will explore and develop ways to link the various ecological models arising from each component. The SERAP project team also will work closely with members of the LCCs and other partnerships throughout the life of the project to ensure that the objectives of the project meet resources mangers needs in the Southeast.

Open-File Report↗

Aggregate resource availability in the conterminous United States, including suggestions for addressing shortages, quality, and environmental concerns

One-third of America's major roads are in poor or mediocre condition, and over one-quarter of the bridges are either structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. A 70-percent increase in annual aggregate production may be required to upgrade the transportation infrastructure. Natural aggregate is widespread throughout the conterminous United States, but the location of aggregate is determined by geology and is non-negotiable. Natural aggregate is in short supply in the Coastal Plain and Mississippi embayment, Colorado Plateau and Wyoming Basin, glaciated Midwest, High Plains, and the non-glaciated Northern Plains. A variety of techniques have been used to overcome local shortages, such as the use of substitute materials, recycling, and importing high-quality aggregates from more distant locations. Although potential sources of aggregate are widespread throughout the United States, many sources may not meet certain physical property requirements, such as soundness, hardness, strength, porosity, and specific gravity, or they may contain contaminants or deleterious materials that render them unusable. Encroachment by conflicting land uses, permitting considerations, environmental issues, and societal pressures can prevent or limit development of otherwise suitable aggregate. The use of sustainable aggregate resource management can help ensure an economically viable supply of aggregate. Sustainable aggregate resource management techniques that have successfully been used include (1) protecting potential resources from encroachment; (2) using marginal-quality local aggregate for applications that do not demand a high-quality resource; (3) using substitute materials such as clinker, scoria, and recycled asphalt and concrete; and (4) using rail and water to transport aggregates from remote sources.

Open-File Report↗

Strategic directions for U.S. Geological Survey water science, 2012-2022 - Observing, understanding, predicting, and delivering water science to the Nation

Executive Summary This report expands the Water Science Strategy that was begun in the USGS Science Strategy, “Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges—U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017” (U.S. Geological Survey, 2007). The report looks at the relevant issues facing society and develops a strategy built around observing, understanding, predicting, and delivering water science for the next 5 to 10 years by building new capabilities, tools, and delivery systems to meet the Nation’s water-resource needs. This report begins by presenting the vision of water science for the USGS and the societal issues that are influenced by, and in turn influence, the water resources of our Nation. The essence of the Water Strategic Science Plan is built on the concept of “water availability,” defined as spatial and temporal distribution of water quantity and quality, as related to human and ecosystem needs, as affected by human and natural influences . The report also describes the core capabilities of the USGS in water science—the strengths, partnerships, and science integrity that the USGS has built over its 130-year history. Nine priority actions are presented in the report, which combine and elevate the numerous specific strategic actions listed throughout the report. Priority actions were developed as a means of providing the audience of this report with a list for focused attention, even if resources and time limit the ability of managers to address all of the strategic actions in the report. Priority actions focus on the following: Improve integrated science planning for water. Expand and enhance water-resource monitoring networks. Characterize the water cycle through development of state-of-the-art 3-D/4-D hydrogeologic framework models at multiple scales. Clarify the linkage between human water use (engineered hydrology) and the water cycle (natural hydrology). Advance ecological flow science. Provide flood-inundation science and information. Develop rapid deployment teams for water-related emergencies. Conduct integrated watershed assessment, research, and modeling. Deliver water data and analyses to the Nation. The body of the report is presented as a hierarchal set of 5 goals, 14 objectives, and 27 strategic actions that the USGS should undertake to advance water science through year 2022. The goals deal with: Providing society the information it needs regarding the amount and quality of water in all components of the water cycle at high temporal and spatial resolution, nationwide; Advancing our understanding of processes that determine water availability; Predicting changes in the quantity and quality of water resources in response to changing climate, population, land use, and management scenarios; Anticipating and responding to water-related emergencies and conflicts; and Delivering timely hydrologic data, analyses, and decision-support tools seamlessly across the Nation to support water-resource decisions. Scientific information produced on water resources would be without value if it were not communicated to society in a fashion that can inform decisions and actions. Therefore, the chapter following the goals describes how the USGS should inform, involve, and educate society about the science it produces. This includes discussions on local outreach and the use of social media for effective communication. This report concludes with a chapter devoted to the crosscutting science issues of the Water Mission Area with the other USGS Mission Areas: Climate and Land Use Change, Core Science Systems, Ecosystems, Energy and Minerals, Environmental Health Science, and Natural Hazards. Not one of these Mission Areas stands alone—all must work together and integrate their actions to fulfill the USGS science mission for the future. This final chapter identifies the important linkages that must be realized and maintained for this integration to occur.

Open-File Report↗

Proceedings of the Fourth Interagency Conference on Research in the Watersheds—Observing, Studying, and Managing for Change

These proceedings contain the abstracts, manuscripts, and posters of presentations given at the Fourth Interagency Conference on Research in the Watersheds—Observing, Studying, and Managing for Change, held at the Westmark Hotel in Fairbanks, Alaska, September 26–30, 2011. The conference was jointly hosted by the Bureau of Land Management and the National Park Service. Watersheds face resource impacts driven by accelerated change related to land use, population, and climate. About every three years a conference is held to bring together watershed researchers, observers, and managers to share scientific advances and management strategies. This year, the Fourth ICRW took a wider perspective on watershed science and examined some pressing issues of watershed science and management in our largest and perhaps most vulnerable state, Alaska. The purpose of the conference was to better understand the processes driving change and help managers incorporate societal needs and scientific uncertainty in the management of natural resources. The conference echoed similar themes to the last, highlighting the challenges of managing watersheds based on available science when considerably uncertainty remains regarding the hypothesized relationships between observed environmental changes and their ultimate effects. For example, while the scientific case for anthropogenic climate change has been well presented, confirming possible cause and effect relationships between climatic change and physical and ecological impacts in highly variable, natural systems continues to represent a scientific challenge. This goal becomes even more difficult when superimposed upon a long history of natural resource and land management practices that have fundamentally changed the physical, chemical and biological processes important in maintaining naturally functioning ecosystems. Designing and implementing studies to better understand watersheds and clearly communicating the findings to decisionmakers will be the primary challenge for natural resource scientists and managers into the foreseeable future.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

Vegetation changes over 12 years in ungrazed and grazed Conservation Reserve Program Grasslands in the central and southern plains

The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) established under the 1985 Food Security Act has the fundamental objectives of jointly providing economic support to segments of the agricultural community and conservation of natural resources (Osborn, 1997; Heard and others, 2000). Although soil loss on highly erodable lands was the principal natural resource conservation issue addressed in the 1985 CRP, improving water quality and wildlife habitat both became important considerations as the program evolved (Farmer and others, 1988). For example, Best and others (1997) found that production of young birds on CRP fields in the Midwest was ≥15 times the production on row-crop fields because of improved habitat. The increasing importance of wildlife habitat is reflected in continuing refinement of the Environmental Benefits Index (EBI) used by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to quantify the potential benefits of enrolling lands in CRP (Osborn, 1997; Ribaudo and others, 2001). The refinements reflect input furnished by federal, state, and non-government organizations seeking greater wildlife habitat quality on CRP lands (Roseberry and David, 1994; Hughes and others, 1995; Millenbah and others, 1996; Patterson and Best, 1996; Rodgers, 1999; Allen and others, 2001). Refinement in the EBI has changed the types of grasses planted on newly enrolled land. In early CRP signups (1 through 11), 71% of new grassland acres were planted to introduced grasses and legumes [Conservation Practice (CP) 1] while 29% of the acres were planted to native grasses (CP2) (Osborn and others, 1992). By the 27th signup in July 2004, over 34.8 million acres (14 million ha) were enrolled in the CRP. More than 73% of these lands were planted to various mixtures of introduced (CP1) or native (CP2) grasses for a minimal contract period of 10 years (USDA, 2004). Continuation of grass plantings under the 2002 Farm Bill may result in CRP lands furnishing grass dominated cover for 20 or more consecutive years. The species of grass established in seeded grasslands can have a major influence on the potential quality of wildlife habitat where vegetation is maintained over a multi-year period. Different species of grass may have comparable abilities to alleviate soil erosion but furnish dissimilar qualities of wildlife habitat (fig. 1). For example, smooth brome, an introduced cool-season grass (grass species and scientific names are presented in table 1), is highly valued for its erosion control and forage attributes (Casler and Carlson, 1995). Switchgrass, a native warm-season grass, also is valued for its soil and water conservation qualities (Moser and Vogel, 1995) but provides greater benefits for some species of wildlife (Clubine, 1995). The quality of nesting and winter cover for ring-necked pheasants (Phasianus colchicus) furnished by smooth brome on northeastern Colorado CRP lands is inferior to that provided by the taller, more robust switchgrass (Allen, 1994). Characteristics of the agricultural landscape surrounding individual CRP fields also play a role in the wildlife habitat potential of CRP plantings (Weber and others, 2002; Nusser and others, 2004). of native and seeded grasslands change in response to the presence (and absence) of physical disturbances such as fire, grazing, tillage, and haying (Hobbs and Huenneke, 1992; Millenbah and others, 1996; Allen and others, 2001; Renfrew and Ribic, 2001; Swengel and Swengel, 2001). The perpetuation of diversity in species composition and vegetation structure following disturbance sustains desirable habitat for a variety of grassland-dependent wildlife (Hall and Willig, 1994; Barnes and others, 1995; King and Savidge, 1995; Granfors and others, 1996; Herkert and others, 1996; Kurzejeski, 1996; Patterson and Best, 1996; Klute and others, 1997). Undisturbed grasslands have lower grass and forb species diversity, greater amounts of dead plant material, decreased as well as seasonally delayed productivity, and diminished structural diversity of vegetation (Peet and others, 1975; Rice and Parenti, 1978; Butler and Briske, 1988; Campa and Winterstein, 1992). Recommendations for the timing of disturbance to increase grass and forb species diversity range from 3 to 8 years following establishment of seeded grasslands in the northern Great Plains and Midwest (Duebbert and others, 1981; Higgens, 1987; Millenbah and others, 1996). The management interval, however, is affected by climatic conditions, soils, grass species, and management history of the individual stand. We quantified changes in vegetation structure and species composition across the typical 10-year contract period in undisturbed southern and central Great Plains CRP fields (fig. 2) planted to introduced and native grasses. In addition, we compared changes in vegetation in fields grazed during the emergency release of 1996 by comparing conditions prior to grazing and two and four years post grazing relative to changes in similar fields that were not grazed. Documentation of long-term changes in vegetation structure and composition for fields planted to common grass seed mixtures across a wide range of environmental conditions provides information to improve long-term wildlife habitat potential, guide program administration, and define management practices that yield economic benefits to operators while still meeting wildlife and conservation objectives. Emergency grazing provisions of the CRP are controversial. Although grazing can alter vegetative characteristics and reduce habitat quality in the short-term (Temple and others, 1999), periodic disturbance may be necessary to maintain habitat quality, and more information is needed assessing long-term effects of emergency grazing on vegetative structure and species composition.

Conference Paper↗

Water quality in the vicinity of Mosquito Creek Lake, Trumbull County, Ohio, in relation to the chemistry of locally occurring oil, natural gas, and brine

Environmental samples collected in the Mosquito Creek Lake area were used to characterize water quality in relation to the chemistry of locally occurring oil, natural gas, and brine and to establish baseline water quality. Mosquito Creek Lake (a manmade reservoir) and the shallow bedrock aquifers near the lake are major sources of potable water in central Trumbull County. The city of Warren relies on the lake as a sole source of potable water. Some of the lake bottom may be in direct hydraulic connection with the underlying aquifers. The city of Cortland, along the southeastern shore of the lake, relies on the Cussewago Sandstone aquifer as a sole source of potable water. This aquifer subcrops beneath the glacio-fluvial sediments that underlie the lake. Nearly all residential homes around the lake, with the exception of homes in the city of Cortland, rely on domestic supply wells as a source of potable water. Oil and natural gas exploration and production have been ongoing in the Mosquito Creek Lakearea since the discovery of the historic Mecca Oil Pool in the Mississippian Berea and Cussewago Sandstones in 1860. Since the late 1970' s, the major drilling objective and zone of production is the Lower Silurian Clinton sandstone. The oil and natural gas resources of the Mosquito Creek Lake area, including reservoir pressure, production history, and engineering and abandonment practices are described in this report. The chemical and isotopic characteristics of the historic Mecca oil and natural gas are very different than those of the Clinton sandstone oil and natural gas. Gas chromatograms show that Mecca oil samples are extensively altered by biodegradation, whereas Clinton sandstone oils are not. Extensive alteration of Mecca oil is consistent with their occurrence at very shallow depths (less than 100 ft below land surface) where microbial activity can affect their composition. Also, the carbon-isotope composition of dissolved methane gas from Berea and Cussewago Sandstone water samples indicates that the gas is microbially generated, whereas the Clinton sandstone gases are thermogenically generated. Methane gas, in addition to crude oil, occurs naturally in the shallow Berea and Cussewago Sandstone aquifers in the Mosquito Creek Lake area and concentrations of dissolved methane are significant in the city of Cortland public-supply wells and in the domestic-supply wells near the southern shore of the lake. Water associated with oil and gas in the Clinton sandstone is a brine with high concentrations of chloride. Water from the Berea and Cussewago Sandstones, however, is fresh and potable. The contrasting geochemical characteristics are important for addressing water-quality issues that relate to oil and natural gas development in the Mosquito Creek area. A reexamination of the geologic framework and results of a subsurface-gas survey show that crude oil in the historic Mecca Oil Pool probably does not seep into Mosquito Creek Lake. Environmental samples show no evidence of any measurable release of oil, gas, or brine from the deeper Clinton sandstone oil and gas wells to the shallow aquifers, the lake, or lake tributaries. Brine is not associated with the hydrocarbons in the shallow Berea-Cussewago aquifer system and therefore cannot be a source of brine contamination. A mixing diagram constructed for dissolved bromide and chloride in surface water and water-supply wells shows no demonstrable mixing of these water resources with brine from the Clinton sandstone. There is some notable salinity in surface waters; however, the water is bromide poor, and a mixing diagram indicates that some local ground waters are influenced by halite solutions, presumably derived from leaching of road salt or from septic effluent.

Ohio↗

Public-policy issues associated with the SAFRR Tsunami Scenario

The SAFRR (Science Application for Risk Reduction) tsunami scenario simulates a tsunami generated by a hypothetical magnitude 9.1 earthquake that occurs offshore of the Alaska Peninsula (Kirby and others, 2013). In addition to the work performed by the authors on public-policy issues associated with the SAFRR tsunami scenario, this section of the scenario also reflects the policy discussions of the State of California’s Tsunami Policy Work Group, a voluntary advisory body formed in October 2011, which operates under the California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA), Department of Conservation, and is charged with identifying, evaluating, and making recommendations to resolve issues that are preventing full and effective implementation of tsunami hazard mitigation and risk reduction throughout California’s coastal communities. It also presents the analyses of plans and hazard policies of California’s coastal counties, incorporated cities, and major ports performed by the staff of the California Geological Survey (CGS) and Lauren Prehoda, Office of Environmental and Government Affairs, California Department of Conservation. It also draws on the policy framework and assessment prepared for the ARkStorm Pacific Coast winter storm and catastrophic flooding (Topping and others, 2010).

Open-File Report↗