Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Ecosystem Services”

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 937 records · Page 52Linked to original sources
USGS2007

Coastal systems and low-lying areas

Since the IPCC Third Assessment Report (TAR), our understanding of the implications of climate change for coastal systems and low-lying areas (henceforth referred to as ‘coasts’) has increased substantially and six important policy-relevant messages have emerged. Coasts are experiencing the adverse consequences of hazards related to climate and sea level (very high confidence). Coasts are highly vulnerable to extreme events, such as storms, which impose substantial costs on coastal societies [6.2.1, 6.2.2, 6.5.2]. Annually, about 120 million people are exposed to tropical cyclone hazards, which killed 250,000 people from 1980 to 2000 [6.5.2]. Through the 20th century, global rise of sea level contributed to increased coastal inundation, erosion and ecosystem losses, but with considerable local and regional variation due to other factors [6.2.5, 6.4.1]. Late 20th century effects of rising temperature include loss of sea ice, thawing of permafrost and associated coastal retreat, and more frequent coral bleaching and mortality [6.2.5]. Coasts will be exposed to increasing risks, including coastal erosion, over coming decades due to climate change and sea-level rise (very high confidence). Anticipated climate-related changes include: an accelerated rise in sea level of up to 0.6 m or more by 2100; a further rise in sea surface temperatures by up to 3°C; an intensification of tropical and extra-tropical cyclones; larger extreme waves and storm surges; altered precipitation/run-off; and ocean acidification [6.3.2]. These phenomena will vary considerably at regional and local scales, but the impacts are virtually certain to be overwhelmingly negative [6.4, 6.5.3]. Corals are vulnerable to thermal stress and have low adaptive capacity. Increases in sea surface temperature of about 1 to 3°C are projected to result in more frequent coral bleaching events and widespread mortality, unless there is thermal adaptation or acclimatisation by corals [Box 6.1, 6.4]. Coastal wetland ecosystems, such as saltmarshes and mangroves, are especially threatened where they are sediment starved or constrained on their landward margin [6.4.1]. Degradation of coastal ecosystems, especially wetlands and coral reefs, has serious implications for the well-being of societies dependent on the coastal ecosystems for goods and services [6.4.2, 6.5.3]. ncreased flooding and the degradation of freshwater, fisheries and other resources could impact hundreds of millions of people, and socio-economic costs on coasts will escalate as a result of climate change [6.4.2, 6.5.3]. The impact of climate change on coasts is exacerbated by increasing human-induced pressures (very high confidence). Utilisation of the coast increased dramatically during the 20th century and this trend is virtually certain to continue through the 21st century. Under the SRES scenarios, the coastal population could grow from 1.2 billion people (in 1990) to 1.8 to 5.2 billion people by the 2080s, depending on assumptions about migration [6.3.1]. Increasing numbers of people and assets at risk at the coast are subject to additional stresses due to land-use and hydrological changes in catchments, including dams that reduce sediment supply to the coast [6.3.2]. Populated deltas (especially Asian megadeltas), low-lying coastal urban areas and atolls are key societal hotspots of coastal vulnerability, occurring where the stresses on natural systems coincide with low human adaptive capacity and high exposure [6.4.3]. Regionally, South, South- East and East Asia, Africa and small islands are most vulnerable [6.4.2]. Climate change therefore reinforces the desirability of managing coasts in an integrated manner [6.6.1.3]. Adaptation for the coasts of developing countries will be more challenging than for coasts of developed countries, due to constraints on adaptive capacity (high confidence). While physical exposure can significantly influence vulnerability for both human populations and natural systems, a lack of adaptive capacity is often the most important factor that creates a hotspot of human vulnerability. Adaptive capacity is largely dependent upon development status. Developing nations may have the political or societal will to protect or relocate people who live in low-lying coastal zones, but without the necessary financial and other resources/capacities, their vulnerability is much greater than that of a developed nation in an identical coastal setting. Vulnerability will also vary between developing countries, while developed countries are not insulated from the adverse consequences of extreme events [6.4.3, 6.5.2]. Adaptation costs for vulnerable coasts are much less than the costs of inaction (high confidence). Adaptation costs for climate change are much lower than damage costs without adaptation for most developed coasts, even considering only property losses and human deaths [6.6.2, 6.6.3]. As post-event impacts on coastal businesses, people, housing, public and private social institutions, natural resources, and the environment generally go unrecognised in disaster cost accounting, the full benefits of adaptation are even larger [6.5.2, 6.6.2]. Without adaptation, the high-end sea-level rise scenarios, combined with other climate changes (e.g., increased storm intensity), are as likely as not to render some islands and lowlying areas unviable by 2100, so effective adaptation is urgently required [6.6.3]. The unavoidability of sea-level rise, even in the longer-term, frequently conflicts with present-day human development patterns and trends (high confidence). Sea-level rise has substantial inertia and will continue beyond 2100 for many centuries. Irreversible breakdown of the West Antarctica and/or Greenland ice sheets, if triggered by rising temperatures, would make this long-term rise significantly larger, ultimately questioning the viability of many coastal settlements across the globe. The issue is reinforced by the increasing human use of the coastal zone. Settlement patterns also have substantial inertia, and this issue presents a challenge for long-term coastal spatial planning. Stabilisation of climate could reduce the risks of ice sheet breakdown, and reduce but Chapter 6 Coastal systems and low-lying areas 317 not stop sea-level rise due to thermal expansion [Box 6.6]. Hence, it is now more apparent than it was in the TAR that the most appropriate response to sea-level rise for coastal areas is a combination of adaptation to deal with the inevitable rise, and mitigation to limit the long-term rise to a manageable level [6.6.5, 6.7].

Book chapter↗
USGS2006

Ecological consequences of changing hydrological conditions in wetland forests of coastal Louisiana

Large-scale and localized alterations of processes affecting deltaic coastal wetlands have caused the complete loss of some coastal wetland forests and reduced the productivity and vigor of many areas in coastal Louisiana. This loss and degradation threatens ecosystem functions and the services they provide. This paper summarizes ecological relationships controlled by hydrological processes in coastal wetland forests of the Mississippi River delta and presents two case studies that illustrate the complexity of assessing hydrological control on swamp forest establishment and growth. Productivity of overstory trees has been affected by these changes, but the first case study illustrates that the relationship between flooding and growth may be site-specific. An important effect of increased flooding has been to reduce regeneration of swamp forest trees. The second case study is an outline of the kind of hydrological analysis required to assess probability of regeneration success.

Louisiana↗
USGS2020

Benthic infaunal communities of Baltimore and Norfolk Canyons

The imperative for finding, cataloging, and understanding continental margin diversity derives from the many key functions, goods and services provided by margin ecosystems and by an increasingly deleterious human footprint on our continental slopes (Levin and Dayton 2009). Progress in seafloor mapping technology and direct observation has revealed unexpected heterogeneity, with a mosaic of habitats and ecosystems linked to geomorphological, geochemical, and hydrographic features that are capable of influencing biotic diversity (Levin and Sibuet 2012). Submarine canyons are dramatic and widespread topographic features crossing continental and island margins in oceans, connecting shelf-margins to deep ocean basins (Harris and Whiteway 2011). Their importance as biodiversity hotspots has continued to emerge over the last two decades as research efforts have increased. Understanding the physical parameters within a canyon system is a primary factor for understanding habitat variability and ecological patterns within the confines of canyon systems (Levin et al. 2001). Margin sediments exhibit ubiquitous depth zonation (Carney et al. 2005), with a diverse suite of species that occupy restricted bathymetric ranges along any given section of the margin. Major shifts in composition among taxa are observed at the shelf-slope transition zone (canyons <500 m), along the upper slope (1,000 m), and at the lower slope transition zone (<3,000 m) (Gibson et al. 2005). In the deep sea, macrofaunal assemblages are generally limited by the availability of allochthonous organic material (Rowe et al. 1982, Billet et al. 1983, Rex et al. 2005, Smith et al. 2008) where macrofaunal densities usually decline with depth and distance from the shore (Rowe et al. 1982, Houston and Haedrich 1984, Rex et al. 2005). However, canyon fauna can experience enhanced food supply through the resuspension and deposition of organic-rich sediments, delivered by increased current velocities within the confines of the canyon (Rowe 1971, Shepard et al. 1974). As a result, canyons are often reported as sustaining enhanced abundances and biomass compared with nearby open slope habitats at similar depths (Vetter and Dayton 1998, Duineveld et al. 2001, De Leo et al. 2010) as well as enhancing regional (γ) and local (α) biodiversity (Hecker et al. 1983, Vetter and Dayton 1998, De Leo et al. 2010, Vetter et al. 2010). Furthermore, enhanced habitat heterogeneity can also be a major structuring agent of ecological assemblages, promoting beta (β) diversity (McClain and Barry 2010) in canyon environments. Canyon systems have often been described as biodiversity hotspots, especially at mid-slope depths (Levin and Sibuet 2012) where physical processes, characterized by complex patterns in hydrography, promote topographically induced upwelling, enhanced mixing via internal tides, and the focusing of tidal bores (Vetter and Dayton 1998, Cacchione et al. 2002). Additionally, sediment transport and accumulation (García et al. 2008) represent important influential ecological drivers. Factors such as substrata heterogeneity (Levin and Sibuet 2012) and concentration of organic matter (De Leo et al. 2010) have been suggested to explain higher faunal diversity, abundance, and benthic productivity found in canyon systems compared with surrounding areas. Bathymetric patterns of species diversity have been attributed to changes in sediment characteristics (Etter and Grassle 1992), productivity, currents, oxygen, disturbance, and the interplay of biotic effects with depth and latitude (Levin et al. 2001, Carney et al. 2005). Recent studies report on the uniqueness of canyon benthic communities and habitats and the view that no two canyons are alike (Cunha et al. 2011). Certain submarine canyons may maintain 436 characteristic and unique faunas, but more often canyon macrofaunal assemblages show high dominance and locally reduced biodiversity (Rowe 1971, Gage 1997, Curdia et al. 2004, Cun

Baltimore Canyon, Norfolk Canyon↗
USGS2004

Global change impacts on mangrove ecosystems

Mangroves are tropical/subtropical communities of primarily tree species that grow in the intertidal zone. These tidal forests are important coastal ecosystems that are valued for a variety of ecological and societal goods and services. Major local threats to mangrove ecosystems worldwide include clearcutting and trimming of forests for urban, agricultural, or industrial expansion; hydrological alterations; toxic chemical spills; and eutrophication. In many countries with mangroves, much of the human population resides in the coastal zone, and their activities often negatively impact the integrity of mangrove forests. In addition, eutrophication, which is the process whereby nutrients build up to higher than normal levels in a natural system, is possibly one of the most serious threats to mangroves and associated ecosystems such as coral reefs. Scientists with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) at the National Wetlands Research Center are working to more fully understand global impacts on these significant ecosystems. Changes in climate and other factors may also affect mangroves, but in complex ways. Global warming may promote expansion of mangrove forests to higher latitudes and accelerate sea-level rise through melting of polar ice or steric expansion of oceans. Changes in sea level would alter flooding patterns and the structure and areal extent of mangroves. Climate change may also alter rainfall patterns, which would in turn change local salinity regimes and competitive interactions of mangroves with other wetland species. Increases in frequency or intensity of tropical storms and hurricanes in combination with sea-level rise may alter erosion and sedimentation rates in mangrove forests. Another global change factor that may directly affect mangrove growth is increased atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), caused by burning of fossil fuels and other factors. Elevated CO 2 concentration may increase mangrove growth by stimulating photosynthesis or improving water use efficiency, but the consequences of this growth enhancement for the ecosystem are unknown.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2019

Applying concepts of general resilience to large river ecosystems: A case study from the Upper Mississippi and Illinois rivers

Large floodplain-river ecosystems are often highly modified to provide services that society desires, yet these modifications can limit an ecosystem’s ability to adapt to changing conditions. The adaptive capacity of an ecosystem, its general resilience, is a conceptual framework for considering how a system will respond to such changes. We sought to apply aspects of three general resilience principles (diversity and redundancy, connectivity, and controlling variables) to our understanding of floodplain-river ecosystem structure and function. We demonstrate the applicability of this approach in a case study of the Upper Mississippi River System (UMRS). In doing so, we developed ten indicators that highlight important structural and functional aspects of this floodplain-river ecosystem, and likely underlie the capacity of large rivers to cope with environmental change and disturbance. We developed diversity and redundancy indicators for aquatic habitats, patterns of floodplain inundation, and fish communities. Connectivity indicators included metrics of longitudinal and lateral connections. Controlling variable indicators included deviations from historic water surface elevation fluctuations, water clarity, nutrient concentrations, and aquatic invasive species. This set of indicators provides a simple description of the adaptive capacity of four distinct reaches of the UMRS: Upper Impounded, Lower Impounded, Unimpounded Reaches of the Upper Mississippi River and the entire Illinois River. High aquatic habitat diversity and redundancy, fish functional diversity and redundancy, and water clarity, and the scarcity of invasive fish species are all factors that likely contribute to the high general resilience of the Upper Impounded Reach. However, the limited longitudinal connectivity and establishment of a minimum water level for navigation are factors that may inhibit the general resilience of this reach. In the Lower Impounded Reach, there is high within-reach variability for individual indicators such as aquatic habitat diversity, fish functional diversity and redundancy, and longitudinal and lateral connectivity. In the Unimpounded Reach, a high degree of longitudinal connectivity likely enhances its general resilience, but low aquatic habitat diversity, low lateral connectivity, and relatively high number of invasive fish species inhibit general resilience. For the Illinois River Reach, the relatively high fish functional diversity and redundancy likely contributes to its general resilience, whereas high number of invasive fish species, low water clarity, low lateral connectivity, and high range of water levels may inhibit general resilience. Indicators derived from application of concepts of general resilience provide insight into the current coping capacity of the UMRS and identify opportunities for enhancing resilience.

Upper Mississippi River System↗
USGS2010

Biocomplexity in mangrove ecosystems

Mangroves are an ecological assemblage of trees and shrubs adapted to grow in intertidal environments along tropical coasts. Despite repeated demonstration of their economic and societal value, more than 50% of the world's mangroves have been destroyed, 35% in the past two decades to aquaculture and coastal development, altered hydrology, sea-level rise, and nutrient overenrichment. Variations in the structure and function of mangrove ecosystems have generally been described solely on the basis of a hierarchical classification of the physical characteristics of the intertidal environment, including climate, geomorphology, topography, and hydrology. Here, we use the concept of emergent properties at multiple levels within a hierarchical framework to review how the interplay between specialized adaptations and extreme trait plasticity that characterizes mangroves and intertidal environments gives rise to the biocomplexity that distinguishes mangrove ecosystems. The traits that allow mangroves to tolerate variable salinity, flooding, and nutrient availability influence ecosystem processes and ultimately the services they provide. We conclude that an integrated research strategy using emergent properties in empirical and theoretical studies provides a holistic approach for understanding and managing mangrove ecosystems.

Annual Review of Marine Science↗
USGS2015

Effects of Hydrocarbon Extraction on Landscapes of the Appalachian Basin

An important and sometimes overlooked aspect of contemporary natural gas exploration, development, and delivery activities is the geographic profile and spatial footprint that these activities have on the land surface. The function of many ecosystems and the goods and services they provide, in large part, are the result of their natural spatial arrangement on the landscape. Shale-gas development can create alterations to the pattern of land use and land cover, and represents a specific form of land use and land cover change that can substantially impact critical aspects of the spatial pattern, form, and function of landscape interactions, including many biological responses. The need for energy resources has created numerous economic opportunities for hydrocarbon extraction in the Appalachian basin. The development of alternative energy natural gas resources from deep-shale drilling techniques, along with conventional natural gas extraction methods, has created a flurry of wells, roads, pipelines, and related infrastructure across many parts of the region. An unintended and sometimes overlooked consequence of these activities is their effect on the structure and function of the landscape and ecosystems. The collective effect of over 100,000 hydrocarbon extraction permits for oil, coal bed methane, Marcellus and Utica Shale natural gas wells, and other types of hydrocarbon gases and their associated infrastructure has saturated much of the landscape and disturbed the natural environment in the Appalachian basin. The disturbance created by the sheer magnitude of the development of these collective wells and infrastructure directly affects how the landscape and ecosystems function and how they provide ecological goods and services.

New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virgi↗
USGS2020

Solar and sensor geometry, not vegetation response, drive satellite NDVI phenology in widespread ecosystems of the western United States

Satellite-derived phenology metrics are valuable tools for understanding broad-scale patterns and changes in vegetated landscapes over time. However, the extraction and interpretation of phenology in ecosystems with subtle growth dynamics can be challenging. US National Park Service monitoring of evergreen pinyon-juniper ecosystems in the western US revealed an unexpected winter-peaking phenological pattern in normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) time-series derived from Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) imagery. In this paper, we assess the validity of the winter peaks through ground-based observation of phenology and examination of solar and satellite geometry effects. To test the premise of a true vegetation response, we analyzed NDVI values extracted from a time series of ground-based digital camera (‘phenocam’) images collected September 2017 to December 2018 in a pinyon-juniper woodland in Arizona, US. Results show pinyon and juniper growth peaked in the warm season, as did the other species in the phenocam field of view. NDVI time series from four other sensors (Landsat 7, Sentinel-2, VIIRS, and Proba-V) confirmed that winter peaks in this ecosystem are not limited to MODIS products. Examination of NDVI time series (2003–2018) derived from daily 250-m MODIS data in the broader pinyon-juniper ecosystem revealed that solar-to-sensor angle, sensor zenith angle, and forward/back-scatter reflectance explained >80% of intra-annual variability. Solar-to-sensor angle exerted the greatest control, and the direction of its correlation (positive) was the opposite of that which would be expected if it were driven by vegetation greenness. Solar-to-sensor angle is controlled seasonally by solar zenith angle and daily by variations in satellite overpass geometry. We mapped winter peaks across the western US in Google Earth Engine using 500-m MODIS MCD43A4 data, which correct for reflectance differences caused by view angle. In areas where winter vegetation peaks are ecologically improbable (i.e., locations with sub-freezing December temperatures), consistent winter peaks (≥ 14 years in 2003 to 2018) are widespread in both pinyon-juniper and non-pinyon-juniper conifer ecosystems; winter peaks are common (≥ 5 years in 2003 to 2018) across areas of shrubland. We attribute winter peaks to the positive correlation of NDVI with solar-to-sensor angle and solar zenith angle in combination with sparse, vertically oriented evergreen vegetation canopies. Increasing shadow visibility has been shown to increase overall NDVI, and the prevalence of the winter peaking in evergreen western sparse canopy ecosystems is consistent with this hypothesis. The extent of winter peaking patterns may have been previously overlooked due to temporal compositing, curve fitting, and incomplete snow screening.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nev↗
USGS2019

Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units program—2018 year in review

The Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units (CRU) program had an interesting and challenging year in 2018. We made significant strategic advances on many fronts and had setbacks in others. Our relationship with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the agency we belonged to from 1935 to the mid-1990s, was further reinforced through strategic efforts with the Service’s Science Applications senior staff. This is bearing fruit in terms of research collaborations and funding support. As part of a larger effort between the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Ecosystems Mission Area and the Service’s endangered species program, we are also collaborating to address science needs for species in pre-listing status. Barry Grand, Unit Supervisor (South), has been instrumental in this effort. Tom Edwards of the Utah Unit has met with representatives of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies to promote training of leaders and “hands dirty” biologists in species distribution modeling. The Association passed a unanimous resolution endorsing the training at their midyear meeting in March. Tom held a workshop at the annual meeting of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies in September, and future workshops, supported by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, will be held bringing State agency and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologists together to work on species of common concern. Wyoming Unit Leader Matt Kauffman’s pioneering work in identifying and mapping big-game migration corridors has captured the attention of conservationists far and wide. In the spring, the Secretary of the Interior signed Secretarial Order No. 3362, "Improving Habitat Quality in Western Big-Game Winter Range and Migration Corridors" directing efforts of several U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) bureaus to collaborate with States in identifying and protecting big-game corridors in 11 States. Matt has conducted several workshops that directly support the Secretarial order, and more are planned. Corridor mapping efforts supported by the USGS and the DOI, based in the States and coordinated by Matt, are unfolding. Unit Administrative Officer Shana Coulby and her staff hosted a training program for university support staff at USGS National Headquarters in March. Shana’s team did a superb job, and the camaraderie among all was evident. We co-sponsored the third in a series of workshops at the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference in March on bridging the gap between science and management. The State Department requested that we coordinate a workshop that would bring CRU scientists and other U.S. representatives together with Brazilian, Colombian, and Peruvian scientists and decision makers to develop best practices to minimize environmental damage from infrastructure development in the Amazon and to collaborate on science needs. The workshop was held in Iquitos, Peru, in the heart of the Amazon during August. Our cooperator community, represented by the National Cooperators Coalition, was very active in response to the President’s budget proposal that would have redirected funding for the CRU program to other priorities. Their efforts are reflected in the House and Senate marks on the fiscal year 2019 budget that not only restored funding, but recommended increases. You will see in this report many other accomplishments of our individual scientists and students during 2018. It was an impressive and productive year! What you won’t see chronicled is the work of the CRU headquarters staff and University support staff. These folks are extraordinary in their dedication to working with cooperators and scientists to solve problems and ensure the important work gets accomplished with minimal interference. We are truly fortunate to have such skilled and dedicated folks in the trenches. I was fortunate to visit several units during 2018. For me, this is the most enriching part of my duties. I get to see firsthand the work our scientists do, the incredible students being mentored, and meet our cooperators on their turf. As we look forward towards the horizon, 2019 looks brighter for the CRU program. Efforts by our cooperators to generate support for filling our vacancies are materializing. Our cadre of scientists is second to none, and the breadth and depth of our work are nothing short of impressive. Thanks to all who are part of this cooperative endeavor—conservation is the ultimate winner in our efforts!

Circular↗
USGS2014

ARkStorm@Tahoe: Stakeholder perspectives on vulnerabilities and preparedness for an extreme storm event in the greater Lake Tahoe, Reno, and Carson City region

Atmospheric rivers (ARs) are strongly linked to extreme winter precipitation events in the Western U.S., accounting for 80 percent of extreme floods in the Sierra Nevada and surrounding lowlands. In 2010, the U.S. Geological Survey developed the ARkStorm extreme storm scenario for California to quantify risks from extreme winter storms and to allow stakeholders to better explore and mitigate potential impacts. To explore impacts on natural resources and communities in montane and adjacent environments, we downscaled the scenario to the greater Lake Tahoe, Reno and Carson City region of northern Nevada and California. This ArkStorm@Tahoe scenario was presented at six stakeholder meetings, each with a different geographic and subject matter focus. Discussions were facilitated by the ARkStorm@Tahoe team to identify social and ecological vulnerabilities to extreme winter storms, science and information needs, and proactive measures that might minimize impacts from this type of event. Information collected in these meetings was used to develop a tabletop emergency response exercise and set of recommendations for increasing resilience to extreme winter storm events in both Tahoe and the downstream communities of Northern Nevada. Over 300 individuals participated in ARkStorm@Tahoe stakeholder meetings and the emergency response exercise, including representatives from emergency response, natural resource and ecosystem management, health and human services, public utilities, and businesses. Interruption of transportation, communications, and lack of power and backup fuel supplies were identified as the most likely and primary points of failure across multiple sectors and geographies, as these interruptions have cascading effects on natural and human systems by impeding emergency response efforts. Other key issues that arose in discussions included contamination risks to water supplies and aquatic ecosystems, especially in the Tahoe Basin and Pyramid Lake, interagency coordination, credentialing, flood management, and coordination of health and human services during such an event. Mitigation options were identified for each of the key issues. Several science needs were identified, particularly the need for improved flood inundation maps. Finally, key lessons learned were identified and may help to increase preparedness, response and recovery from extreme storms in the future.

Report↗
USGS2008

National parks: Chapter 4

Covering about 4% of the United States, the 338,000 km² of protected areas in the National Park System contain representative landscapes of all of the nation’s biomes and ecosystems. The U.S. National Park Service Organic Act established the National Park System in 1916 “to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.”1 Approximately 270 national park system areas contain significant natural resources. Current National Park Service policy for natural resource parks calls for management to preserve fundamental physical and biological processes, as well as individual species, features, and plant and animal communities. Parks with managed natural resources range from large intact (or nearly intact) ecosystems with a full complement of native species— including top predators—to those diminished by disturbances such as within-park or surrounding-area legacies of land use, invasive species, pollution, or regional manipulation of resources. The significance of national parks as representatives of naturally functioning ecosystems and as refugia for natural processes and biodiversity increases as surrounding landscapes become increasingly altered by human activities.

Synthesis and Assessment Product↗
USGS2019

Remote sensing of dryland ecosystem structure and function: Progress, challenges, and opportunities

Drylands make up roughly 40% of the Earth's land surface, and billions of people depend on services provided by these critically important ecosystems. Despite their relatively sparse vegetation, dryland ecosystems are structurally and functionally diverse, and emerging evidence suggests that these ecosystems play a dominant role in the trend and variability of the terrestrial carbon sink. More, drylands are highly sensitive to climate and are likely to have large, non-linear responses to hydroclimatic change. Monitoring the spatiotemporal dynamics of dryland ecosystem structure (e.g., leaf area index) and function (e.g., primary production and evapotranspiration) is therefore a high research priority. Yet, dryland remote sensing is defined by unique challenges not typically encountered in mesic or humid regions. Major challenges include low vegetation signal-to-noise ratios, high soil background reflectance, presence of photosynthetic soils (i.e., biological soil crusts), high spatial heterogeneity from plot to regional scales, and irregular growing seasons due to unpredictable seasonal rainfall and frequent periods of drought. Additionally, there is a relative paucity of continuous, long-term measurements in drylands, which impedes robust calibration and evaluation of remotely-sensed dryland data products. Due to these issues, remote sensing techniques developed in other ecosystems or for global application often result in inaccurate, poorly constrained estimates of dryland ecosystem structural and functional dynamics. Here, we review past achievements and current progress in remote sensing of dryland ecosystems, including a detailed discussion of the major challenges associated with remote sensing of key dryland structural and functional dynamics. We then identify strategies aimed at leveraging new and emerging opportunities in remote sensing to overcome previous challenges and more accurately contextualize drylands within the broader Earth system. Specifically, we recommend: 1) Exploring novel combinations of sensors and techniques (e.g., solar-induced fluorescence, thermal, microwave, hyperspectral, and LiDAR) across a range of spatiotemporal scales to gain new insights into dryland structural and functional dynamics; 2) utilizing near-continuous observations from new-and-improved geostationary satellites to capture the rapid responses of dryland ecosystems to diurnal variation in water stress; 3) expanding ground observational networks to better represent the heterogeneity of dryland systems and enable robust calibration and evaluation; 4) developing algorithms that are specifically tuned to dryland ecosystems by utilizing expanded ground observational network data; and 5) coupling remote sensing observations with process-based models using data assimilation to improve mechanistic understanding of dryland ecosystem dynamics and to better constrain ecological forecasts and long-term projections.

Remote Sensing of Environment↗
USGS2011

Networks - The assessment of marine reserve networks: Guidelines for ecological evaluation

As marine ecosystems are plagued by an ever-increasing suite of threats including climate change, pollution, habitat degradation, and fisheries impacts (Roessig et al ., 2004; Lotze et al ., 2006; Jackson, 2008), there are now no ocean areas that are exempt from anthropogenic impacts (Halpern et al ., 2008). In order to preserve marine biodiversity, ecosystem function, and the goods and services provided by resistant and/or resilient systems, marine reserves have been increasingly recommended as part of an ecosystem-based approach to management (Browman and Stergiou, 2004; Levin et al ., 2009). Marine reserves are defined as “areas of the ocean completely protected from all extractive and destructive activities” (Lubchenco et al ., 2003) and can be experimental controls for evaluating the impact of these activities on marine ecosystems. Growing scientific information has shown consistent increases in species density, biomass, size, and diversity in response to full protection inside reserves of varying sizes and ages located in diverse regions (Claudet et al ., 2008; Lester et al ., 2009; Molloy et al ., 2009). However, most of these data are from individual marine reserves and therefore have inherently limited transferability to networks of marine reserves, which when properly designed can outperform single marine reserves for a variety of ecological, economic, and social management goals (Roberts et al ., 2003; Almany et al ., 2009; Gaines et al ., 2010). The concept of marine reserve networks grew out of a desire to achieve both conservation and fishery management goals by minimizing the potential negative economic, social, and cultural impacts of a single large reserve while still producing similar or even greater ecological and economic returns (Murray et al ., 1999; Gaines et al ., 2010). In addition, reserves networks can provide insurance by protecting areas across a region and spreading the risk that these sites may be impacted by localized catastrophes such as hurricanes or oil spills (Allison et al ., 2003). The World Conservation Union's Marine Programme defines a network as “a collection of individual marine protected areas (MPAs) or reserves operating co-operatively and synergistically, at various spatial scales and with a range of protection levels that are designed to meet objectives that a single reserve cannot achieve” (IUCN–WCPA, 2008). However, general terms such as “co-operatively” and “synergistically” can have myriad meanings. Without a clear definition of a network, it becomes difficult to identify attainable management goals and design a process for evaluating whether the network achieves those goals. Besides, different management goals may in turn result in the need for different types of networks. The use of MPAs with varying protection levels together with no-take zones in multiple-zoning schemes adds another layer of complexity to network design and evaluation; however, partially protected areas are generally used to manage coastal uses and avoid conflicts (rather than for strict ecological purposes) and are therefore a function of the local social, economic, and cultural context. As we are here interested in the ecological effects of networks, for the purposes of this chapter, we focus on marine reserves because these areas are no-take and therefore offer greater ecological benefits than other types of MPAs that allow some forms of extraction (Lester and Halpern, 2008).

Book chapter↗
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↗
USGS2014

Establishing a baseline for regional scale monitoring of eelgrass ( Zostera marina ) habitat on the lower Alaska Peninsula

Seagrass meadows, one of the world&rsquo;s most widespread and productive ecosystems, provide a wide range of services with real economic value. Worldwide declines in the distribution and abundance of seagrasses and increased threats to coastal ecosystems from climate change have prompted a need to acquire baseline data for monitoring and protecting these important habitats. We assessed the distribution and abundance of eelgrass ( Zostera marina ) along nearly 1200 km of shoreline on the lower Alaska Peninsula, a region of expansive eelgrass meadows whose status and trends are poorly understood. We demonstrate the effectiveness of a multi-scale approach by using Landsat satellite imagery to map the total areal extent of eelgrass while integrating field survey data to improve map accuracy and describe the physical and biological condition of the meadows. Innovative use of proven methods and processing tools was used to address challenges inherent to remote sensing in high latitude, coastal environments. Eelgrass was estimated to cover ~31,000 ha, 91% of submerged aquatic vegetation on the lower Alaska Peninsula, nearly doubling the known spatial extent of eelgrass in the region. Mapping accuracy was 80%&ndash;90% for eelgrass distribution at locations containing adequate field survey data for error analysis.

Alaska↗
USGS2017

The Moquah Barrens Research Natural Area: Loss of a pine barrens ecosystem

The Moquah Barrens Research Natural Area (RNA) was established by the Chequamegon National Forest and the Lakes States Forest Experiment Station in 1935 with a research objective well-suited to the needs of the Forest Service and the scientific understanding of ecosystem function prevalent at the time of establishment. The original research plan was never implemented, which led to a joint Forest-Station decision in 1956 to disestablish the RNA. However, that decision was never implemented. A series of management decisions made after 1956 led to the loss of the pine barrens ecosystem originally encompassed by the RNA. This loss is not irretrievable and the work necessary to recover the original ecosystem is possible under existing RNA management guidelines. The experience of the Moquah Barrens RNA can be used by the Forest Service to improve overall management of the entire system of research natural areas. Two main areas of opportunity are identified: 1) implement an improved approach to managing official records associated with RNAs; and 2) adopt a management framework suitable for long-term ecological projects.

Wisconsin↗
USGS2008

A Landscape Indicator Approach to the Identification and Articulation of the Ecological Consequences of Land Cover Change in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed, 1970-2000

The advancement of geographic science in the area of land surface status and trends and land cover change is at the core of the current geographic scientific research of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (McMahon and others, 2005). Perhaps the least developed or articulated aspects of USGS land change science have been the identification and analysis of the ecological consequences of land cover change. Changes in land use and land cover significantly affect the ability of ecosystems to provide essential ecological goods and services, which, in turn, affect the economic, public health, and social benefits that these ecosystems provide. One of the great scientific challenges for geographic science is to understand and calibrate the effects of land use and land cover change and the complex interaction between human and biotic systems at a variety of natural, geographic, and political scales. Understanding the dynamics of land surface change requires an increased understanding of the complex nature of human-environmental systems and will require a suite of scientific tools that include traditional geographic data and analysis methods, such as remote sensing and geographic information systems (GIS), as well as innovative approaches to understanding the dynamics of complex systems. One such approach that has gained much recent scientific attention is the landscape indicator, or landscape assessment, approach, which has been developed with the emergence of the science of landscape ecology.

Fact Sheet↗