Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Publication”

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
USGS2022

Contaminants of emerging concern in the Great Lakes: Science to inform management practices for protecting the health and integrity of wildlife populations from adverse effects: GLRI action plan I, focus area 1, goal 5

Executive Summary: Under Action Plan I (2010-2014) of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI), Federal and Academic partners began an investigation of the presence and distribution of contaminants of emerging concern (CECs) in the Great Lakes and potential impacts on fish and wildlife. The term CECs is applied to a broad range of chemicals that are currently in use but for which we currently lack good understanding of whether fish, wildlife, or humans are being exposed and/or whether negative health or environmental effects are expected if exposure occurs. Pharmaceuticals, personal care products, flame retardants, many current use pesticides, and poly- and perfluorinated chemicals are some well-known groups of CECs, but there is no definitive or comprehensive list that can be used to support the management of CECs to reduce impacts on the Great Lakes ecosystem. Four overarching goals were identified for this collaborative investigation: 1. Evaluate the sources, occurrence, and distribution of CECs across the Great Lakes Basin. 2. Examine associations between the distribution of CECs and land-use patterns. 3. Review both scientific literature and field-generated data to determine the potential for CECs to cause adverse effects on Great Lakes fish and wildlife populations. 4. Develop efficient strategies to survey and/or monitor for threats that CECs may pose in order to take effective management actions before those threats evolve into large scale impacts on Great Lakes ecosystems or the services they provide. Achievement of these goals ensures progress towards Focus Area 1: Toxic Substances and Areas of Concern from GLRI Action Plan I, Goal 5: “ The health and integrity of wildlife populations and habitat are protected from adverse chemical and biological effects associated with the presence of toxic substances in the Great Lakes Basin ”. This large-scale research effort was comprised of individual and collaborative projects from multiple federal agencies and academic institutions, involving over 85 investigators, and overseen by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 5, Great Lakes National Program Office. Partners include the United States Geological Survey, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Saint Cloud State University, the U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Key findings: 1. Contaminants of emerging concern were found throughout the monitored Great Lakes tributaries, but types and concentrations vary in association with regional land use. CECs were detected in nearly all samples collected. The type and concentration of the specific contaminants detected varied considerably among field sites and in association with land use type, such as urban, agricultural, wetland, 2 or forest. Contaminants were detected in the water column, sediment, and tissues of all species surveyed in the current work (mussels, aquatic insects, fish, and insect-eating birds). 2. There were over 20 contaminants for which CEC concentrations approached or exceeded those reported to cause toxicity in laboratory experiments. This was based on detection in water, sediments and or biota at one or more field sites. These contaminants represent compounds that warrant further investigation and monitoring with respect to potential impacts in certain areas of the Great Lakes basin. Based on the present investigation, compounds of greatest concern include: polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, associated with oil-based products and combustion of organic matter; atrazine, an herbicide; dichlorvos, an insecticide; and ibuprofen and venlafaxine, both pharmaceuticals. 3. Results suggest that mixtures of CECs presently found in most Great Lakes tributary locations surveyed may elicit subtle biological effects, but likely are not, alone, causing obvious detriment to current communities of fish and wildlife. CECs detected in the Great Lakes were associated with subtle biological effects like changes in gene expression, altered circulating glucose, etc. in both wild-caught and laboratory-reared organisms. These effects were generally not indicative of reproductive failure or mortality. However, the effects may have more serious implications when combined with other sources of stress like habitat degradation, changing climate conditions, and competition with invasive species. Due to limited historical data, it is unknown whether severe CEC-related impacts have already affected aquatic communities in waterbodies that have received long-term inputs of these contaminants. Likewise, under Action Plan I, biological effects were not necessarily evaluated at the sites where CEC concentrations exceeding laboratory toxicity thresholds were detected. As a result, strategic, ongoing surveillance and monitoring of CECs is warranted. This collaborative investigation resulted in new tools, approaches, and data that can be used to inform and support the management of CECs to reduce their impacts on Great Lakes natural resources. The following products of this research effort are available through https://communities.geoplatform.gov/glri/ or by contacting the investigators (see technical chapters found in Appendices A-F): 1. Database of CEC occurrence and concentrations in US tributary streams. The database includes CEC detections in water, sediment, and fish and wildlife tissues, and represents the most comprehensive survey of CECs in the Great Lakes Region. 2. Synopses of results and key findings. Integrated summaries of results, conclusions, and management implications of the CEC research are available through reports, topical fact sheets, and presentations. 3. Technical publications: This collaborative research effort has resulted in over 50 peer-reviewed publications, agency reports, and data releases that can be of use to resource managers, the scientific community, and members of the public. 4. Innovative tools. Innovative monitoring devices, sampling equipment, conceptual frameworks, and software applications were developed over the course of this 3 research. These tools are transferable to stakeholders via internet accessibility or via specifications, instructions, and demonstration detailed in technical publications. Hypotheses to guide CECs research under Action Plan II. Findings from 2010-2014 were used to guide further research in 2015-2018 for basin-wide surveillance of CECs and for sites warranting further study of potential biological impacts of CECs. Additional surveillance included both evaluation of additional classes of contaminants and expanded lists for chemical classes shown to be of greatest concern. Mixtures of some of the most frequently detected contaminants were also tested in laboratory studies to understand whether long term exposures to multiple contaminants may result in effects not evident from uncontrolled, short-term field experiments.

Great Lakes↗
USGS2012

Bibliography of Dreissena polymorpha (zebra mussels) and Dreissena rostriformis Bugensis (QUAGGA mussels): 1989 to 2011

Dreissenid mussels invaded and colonized waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes during the late 1980s. Their colonization and resulting impact have been characterized as one of the most important ecological changes in freshwater systems in North America. The need for information on dreissenid mussels has grown during the past 2 decades, which has prompted the compilation of this bibliography. Two previous bibliographies of dreissenid mussels indicate average publication rates were 6 publications/year between 1771 and 1964 (1,180 in 194 y) and 30 publications/year between 1964 and 1993 (885 in 30 y). In the current bibliography, the average rate of publication doubled during the past 23 y (1989 to 2011) to 66 publications/year based on a total of 1,502 publications. These rates may be biased by increased numbers of researchers and journals over time but, at a minimum, these rates indicate continued interest and concern by humans about the impact of dreissenid mussels on water availability and the expanding range of dreissenids throughout the world. The current bibliography has a 94% efficiency rate for subject and 100% efficiency for title search criteria when compared with references in published studies of dreissenid mussels in 2011. In addition to publications, we included 206 student theses and 225 chapters in 26 books including 6 books devoted solely to dreissenid mussels. A vast majority of student theses were about dreissenid mussels in North America, especially in the Laurentian Great Lakes. The 6 books devoted to dreissenid mussels contained a variety of chapters that described biology, impact, control, and ecology of dreissenid mussels in both Europe (published in 1992 and 2010) and North America (1993, 1994, 1997, and 2000). In addition, there is a 7th book devoted solely to dreissenid mussels that is near completion.

Journal of Shellfish Research↗
USGS2011

Groundwater quality in the San Diego Drainages Hydrogeologic Province, California

More than 40 percent of California's drinking water is from groundwater. To protect this vital resource, the State of California created the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The Priority Basin Project of the GAMA Program provides a comprehensive assessment of the State's groundwater quality and increases public access to groundwater-quality information. The San Diego Drainages Hydrogeologic Province (hereinafter referred to as San Diego) is one of the study units being evaluated. The San Diego study unit is approximately 3,900 square miles and consists of the Temecula Valley, Warner Valley, and 12 other alluvial basins (California Department of Water Resources, 2003). The study unit also consists of all areas outside defined groundwater basins that are within 3 kilometers of a public-supply well. The study unit was separated, based primarily on hydrogeologic settings, into four study areas: Temecula Valley, Warner Valley, Alluvial Basins, and Hard Rock (Wright and others, 2005). The sampling density for the Hard Rock study area, which consists of areas outside of groundwater basins, was much lower than for the other study areas. Consequently, aquifer proportions for the Hard Rock study area are not used to calculate the aquifer proportions shown by the pie charts. An assessment of groundwater quality for the Hard Rock study area can be found in Wright and Belitz, 2011. The temperatures in the coastal part of the study unit are mild with dry summers, moist winters, and an average annual rainfall of about 10 inches. The temperatures in the mountainous eastern part of the study unit are cooler than in the coastal part, with an annual precipitation of about 45 inches that occurs mostly in the winter. The primary aquifers consist of Quaternary-age alluvium and weathered bedrock in the Temecula Valley, Warner Valley, and Alluvial Basins study areas, whereas in the Hard Rock study area the primary aquifers consist mainly of fractured and decomposed granite of Mesozoic age. The primary aquifers are defined as those parts of the aquifers corresponding to the perforated intervals of wells listed in the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) database. Public-supply wells typically are drilled to depths between 200 and 700 feet, consist of solid casing from the land surface to a depth of about 60 to 170 feet, and are perforated, or consist of an open hole, below the solid casing. Water quality in the shallow and deep parts of the aquifer system may differ from water quality in the primary aquifers. Municipal water use accounts for approximately 70 percent of water used in the study unit; the majority of the remainder is used for agriculture, industry, and commerce. Groundwater accounts for approximately 8 percent of the municipal supply, and surface water, the majority of which is imported, accounts for the rest. Recharge to groundwater occurs through stream-channel infiltration from rivers and their tributaries, infiltration in engineered recharge basins, and infiltration of water from precipitation and irrigation. The primary source of discharge is water pumped from wells.

California↗
USGS1958

Suggestions to authors of the reports of the United States Geological Survey

Knowledge acquired by the Geological Survey through programs of research and investigations has no value to the public if it remains in office files or in the minds of the scientists and engineers who did the work. The full discharge of the Survey's responsibilities is attained only by making its acquired knowledge available promptly and effectively to all people who will find it of interest and use. And, to insure effectiveness, reports must be not only accurate but so clearly and simply written that they are easy to read and understand. Efforts by the Geological Survey to attain high quality in reports are necessarily group efforts. The largest contribution is made by the author, who has assembled facts, has worked out ideas to explain them, and has a direct personal interest in making the facts and ideas clearly and effectively known. The Geological Survey encourages that interest, recognizing that it is an essential ingredient of the high morale of the members of the Survey. Authors should keep in mind, however, that the Survey has a proprietary interest in all their manuscript reports and as proprietor may dispose of the reports, or require that they be changed before publication, as it sees fit. The Survey generally exercises its proprietary interest only to the extent of seeing that a report is scientifically and technically sound, will reach the proper audience, and will reflect credit on both the Survey and the author. To these ends, each report is reviewed by the author's fellow workers, supervisors, and staff officials, who bring to bear upon it their specialized knowledge, skill, judgement to assure a sound product. In its final form each Survey report is that product of team effort in which many persons do their share -- even though most of them remain anonymous. There is no easy way to prepare reports of high quality, any more than there is an easy means of carrying out research to sure and outstanding conclusions. Each task calls for intensive thinking and for preserving work. The author bears the primary responsibility and correspondingly faces the most difficult task. To aid him is the chief purpose of this volume. The subject matter of this volume is arranged under several principal headings. First, a summary is given of the Survey's publications: the historical basis for them, statistics as to what has been issued in the periods 1879-1957, and a list and description of the several series of reports and maps in which material is being published. Next are outlined successive steps that the author will normally take from the start of a project to his final proofreading of the text and illustrations. Under the third broad heading is brought together much detailed information about the form and content of reports. The fourth part of this volume is devoted to advice on expression -- what to seek and what to avoid. A fifth major part of this volume bears on the most common questions of typographic style that affect Survey publications. The final sections of the volume give instructions for typing manuscript copy and correcting the galley and page proofs; also they include a few useful tables and a discussion of the purpose and content of press releases.

Report↗
USGS1916

Contributions to economic geology (short papers and preliminary reports), 1915: Part I. - metals and nonmetals except fuels

This volume is the thirteenth of a series that includes Bulletins 213, 225, 260, 285, 315, 340, 380, 430, 470, 530, 540, and 580, "Contributions to economic geology" for 1902, 1903, 1904, 1905, 1906 (Pt. I), 1907 (Pt. I), 1908 (Pt. I), 1909 (Pt. I), 1910 (P t. I), 1911 (Pt. I) , 1912 (Pt. I), and 1913 (Pt. I), respectively . These bulletins are prepared primarily to insure prompt publication of the economic results of investigations made by the United States Geological Survey. Beginning with the present volume the year included in the title will be the year of publication 1 instead of the year in which the field work reported was done. This volume is therefore dated 1915, and there will be no volume entitled "Contributions to economic geology, 1914." As the subtitle indicates, the papers included are of two classes -(1) short papers giving comparatively detailed description of occurrences that have economic interest but are not of sufficient importance to warrant a more extended description; (2) preliminary reports on economic investigations the results of which are to be published later in more detailed form. These papers are such only as have a direct economic bearing, all topic of purely scientific interest being excluded. Each paper has been issued as an advance chapter as soon as it was ready. Brief abstracts of the publications of the year are given in the annual report of the Director. The complete list of Survey publications affords, by means of finding list of subjects and of authors, further aid in ascertaining the extent of the Survey's work in economic geology. Since 1905 the annual economic bulletin has been printed in two parts, the second part comprising paper on mineral fuels. These volumes for 1906, 1907, 190 , 1909, 1910, 1911, 1912, and 1913 are Bulletins 316, 341, 381, 431, 471, 531, 541, and 581. Bulletin 621 forms Part II of the "Contributions" for 1915. The reports on work in Alaska have been printed in a separate series since 1904, the volume so far issued being Bulletins 259, 284, 314, 345, 379, 442, 480, 520, 542, 592, and 622.

Bulletin↗
USGS1891

Record of North American geology for 1887 to 1889, inclusive

The literary scope of this record includes geologic publications printed in North America and publications on North American geology wherever printed. Chronologically it includes publications issued during the years 1887,1888, and 1889. The List of Publications Examined, page 9, indicates the range of the sources of information.

Bulletin↗
USGS1995

1995 annual report on Alaska's mineral resources

Section 1011 of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) of 1980, as amended, requires that "On or before October 1, 1982, and annually thereafter, the President shall transmit to the Congress all pertinent public information relating to minerals in Alaska gathered by the United States Geological Surveys, United States Bureau of Mines, and any other Federal agency." This report has been prepared in response to that requirement. This circular is the fourteenth in the series of annual mineral reports mandated by the ANILCA. The report provides information about current Alaskan mineral projects and events during 1994; the emphasis is on Federal activity. The report addresses both onshore and offshore areas of Alaska. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), U.S. Bureau of Mines (USBM), and Minerals Management Service (MMS) are the principal Federal agencies that publish information about energy and mineral resources in Alaska. Their reports and data form the basis for decisions by other Federal agencies regarding land use, access, environmental impacts, and mining claim evaluation. The time required for sample analysis, data synthesis, and publication is lengthy; as a result, scientific reports are generally issued a year or more after initial sample and data collection. Other sources of information for this report include additional Federal and State publications, trade and professional journals, presentations at public meetings and hearings, and press releases. Information is provided for two broad categories of minerals: energy resources and nonfuel-mineral resources.

Circular↗
USGS2005

Water resources and the urban environment, lower Charles River watershed, Massachusetts, 1630-2005

The Charles River, one of the Nation’s most historically significant rivers, flows through the center of the Boston metropolitan region in eastern Massachusetts. The lower Charles River, downstream of the original head of tide in Watertown, was originally a productive estuary and important source of fish and shellfish for the Native Americans of the region. This portion of the river has an exceptionally long and colorful human history. In 1615, the explorer Captain John Smith gave the river its modern name, in honor of young Prince Charles of England. In 1617–18, the Native American community of the watershed was decimated by an epidemic, after having continuously occupied the area for the previous 4,000 years. In 1630, the first large group of English settlers, led by John Winthrop, set foot on the Shawmut Peninsula at the mouth of the river, and established the town of Boston. In the 1630s, the first printing press, public park, public school, and college in the English colonies were all established on the banks of the Charles River. Almost immediately, the settlers of Boston and adjacent towns also began to modify the landscape and water resources of the watershed. Perhaps the most important type of landscape alteration in the watershed was the filling of the extensive salt marshes and tidal flats of the estuary downstream of Watertown. This landmaking activity along the lower Charles River began in the mid-1600s, and did not conclude until the 1950s. In the early 20th century, the estuary mouth was dammed, creating a freshwater basin in the lower 9.5 miles of the river. A system of parks and parkways was built along the banks of the impounded river. In addition to the mainstem river, virtually all of the remaining water resources in the watershed have also been altered. Most of the river’s tributaries, for example, were culverted, or placed into tunnels, and many of the ponds and freshwater wetlands in the watershed were filled to facilitate urban development. One additional legacy of the river’s long human history is pollution from industry and sewage. By 1875, a total of 43 mills were operating along the lower Charles River between Watertown Dam and Boston Harbor. Thousands of gallons of untreated sewage and industrial wastewater entered the river daily through gravity drains, posing a major threat to public health. Concerted efforts to address the sewage problem began in the late 1870s. By the 1960s, the water quality of the river was significantly improved, yet still not suitable for swimming, fishing, or even boating under most conditions. In 1965, the Charles River Watershed Association was organized and the call to restore the environmental quality of the river and its parklands was heard anew. Passage of the Federal Clean Water Act in 1972 and the subsequent court-ordered reconstruction of the region’s sewage-treatment infrastructure in the 1980s and 1990s (the “Boston Harbor Cleanup”) provided additional impetus to address the river’s remaining pollution problems. In 1995, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency launched the Clean Charles 2005 Initiative, which brought together government agencies, private-sector institutions, and environmental organizations to focus on restoring the river to fishable and swimmable conditions by Earth Day 2005. This initiative has achieved substantial improvements in water quality; sewage discharges to the river, for example, have been largely eliminated. Nevertheless, it is now widely acknowledged that full attainment of water-quality standards will likely depend upon improved public understanding of the watershed, continued efforts to eliminate illicit sewage discharges to the river, and better management of the urban runoff that enters the river both directly and from its many tributary streams.

Massachusetts↗
USGS2010

Western Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center--providing comprehensive earth science for complex societal issues

Minerals in the environment and products manufactured from mineral materials are all around us and we use and come into contact with them every day. They impact our way of life and the health of all that lives. Minerals are critical to the Nation's economy and knowing where future mineral resources will come from is important for sustaining the Nation's economy and national security. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Mineral Resources Program (MRP) provides scientific information for objective resource assessments and unbiased research results on mineral resource potential, production and consumption statistics, as well as environmental consequences of mining. The MRP conducts this research to provide information needed for land planners and decisionmakers about where mineral commodities are known and suspected in the earth's crust and about the environmental consequences of extracting those commodities. As part of the MRP scientists of the Western Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center (WMERSC or 'Center' herein) coordinate the development of national, geologic, geochemical, geophysical, and mineral-resource databases and the migration of existing databases to standard models and formats that are available to both internal and external users. The unique expertise developed by Center scientists over many decades in response to mineral-resource-related issues is now in great demand to support applications such as public health research and remediation of environmental hazards that result from mining and mining-related activities. Western Mineral and Environmental Resources Science Center Results of WMERSC research provide timely and unbiased analyses of minerals and inorganic materials to (1) improve stewardship of public lands and resources; (2) support national and international economic and security policies; (3) sustain prosperity and improve our quality of life; and (4) protect and improve public health, safety, and environmental quality. The MRP supports approximately 40 USGS research specialists who utilize cooperative agreements with universities, industry, and other governmental agencies to support their collaborative research and information exchange. Scientists of the WMERSC study how and where non-fuel mineral resources form and are concentrated in the earth's crust, where mineral resources might be found in the future, and how mineral materials interact with the environment to affect human and ecosystem health. Natural systems (ecosystems) are complex - our understanding of how ecosystems operate requires collecting and synthesizing large amounts of geologic, geochemical, biologic, hydrologic, and meteorological information. Scientists in the Center strive to understand the interplay of various processes and how they affect the structure, composition, and health of ecosystems. Such understanding, which is then summarized in publicly available reports, is used to address and solve a wide variety of issues that are important to society and the economy. WMERSC scientists have extensive national and international experience in these scientific specialties and capabilities - they have collaborated with many Federal, State, and local agencies; with various private sector organizations; as well as with foreign countries and organizations. Nearly every scientific and societal challenge requires a different combination of scientific skills and capabilities. With their breadth of scientific specialties and capabilities, the scientists of the WMERSC can provide scientifically sound approaches to a wide range of societal challenges and issues. The following sections describe examples of important issues that have been addressed by scientists in the Center, the methods employed, and the relevant conclusions. New directions are inevitable as societal needs change over time. Scientists of the WMERSC have a diverse set of skills and capabilities and are proficient in the collection and integration of

Circular↗
USGS2020

Estimated groundwater withdrawals from principal aquifers in the United States, 2015

In 2015, about 84,600 million gallons per day (Mgal/d) of groundwater were withdrawn in the United States for various uses including public supply, self-supplied domestic, industrial, mining, thermoelectric power, aquaculture, livestock, and irrigation. Of this total, about 94 percent (79,200 Mgal/d) was withdrawn from principal aquifers, which are defined as regionally extensive aquifers or aquifer systems that have the potential to be used as sources of water of suitable quality and quantity to meet various needs. The remaining 6 percent (5,400 Mgal/d) was withdrawn from other, nonprincipal aquifers in the United States. Sixty-six principal aquifers belonging to 5 major lithologic groups have been identified and delineated in the United States, including Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Of the water withdrawn from principal aquifers in 2015, 81 percent (63,900 Mgal/d) was from the unconsolidated and semiconsolidated sand and gravel lithologic group, 7.1 percent (5,630 Mgal/d) was from the igneous and metamorphic-rock lithologic group, 6.8 percent (5,360 Mgal/d) was from the carbonate-rock lithologic group, 3.4 percent (2,680 Mgal/d) was from the sandstone lithologic group, and 2.2 percent (1,710 Mgal/d) was from the sandstone and carbonate-rock lithologic group. The most heavily pumped of the 24 principal aquifers and aquifer systems within the unconsolidated and semiconsolidated sand and gravel lithologic group were the High Plains aquifer (12,300 Mgal/d), Mississippi River Valley alluvial aquifer (12,100 Mgal/d), Central Valley aquifer system (11,100 Mgal/d), and Basin and Range basin-fill aquifers (7,390 Mgal/d). Withdrawals for irrigation were 48,100 Mgal/d and accounted for 75 percent of the total withdrawals from this lithologic group. Although unconsolidated sand and gravel aquifers are widely distributed and were used as sources of water in all States except Hawaii and the U.S. Virgin Islands, 56 percent of the total withdrawn from unconsolidated and semiconsolidated sand and gravel aquifers was in just four States: California (15,600 Mgal/d), Arkansas (9,560 Mgal/d), Nebraska (5,570 Mgal/d), and Texas (4,830 Mgal/d). The most heavily pumped of the seven principal aquifers within the igneous and metamorphic-rock lithologic group were the Snake River Plain (2,930 Mgal/d) and Columbia Plateau basaltic-rock aquifers (1,080 Mgal/d), which are located in the northwestern United States and together accounted for 71 percent of the water withdrawn from this lithologic group. Withdrawals for irrigation were 4,190 Mgal/d and accounted for more than 74 percent of the total withdrawals from this lithologic group. Seventy-eight percent of the withdrawals from igneous and metamorphic-rock aquifers were in three States: Idaho (3,230 Mgal/d), Washington (614 Mgal/d), and Oregon (528 Mgal/d). The most heavily pumped of the 15 principal aquifers and aquifer systems within the carbonate-rock lithologic group were the Floridan aquifer system (3,180 Mgal/d) and the Biscayne aquifer (679 Mgal/d), which are in the southeastern United States and together accounted for almost 72 percent of the withdrawals from this lithologic group. Withdrawals for public supply (2,440 Mgal/d) and irrigation (1,610 Mgal/d) together accounted for almost 76 percent of the total withdrawals from this lithologic group. Although water was withdrawn from carbonate-rock aquifers in 35 States, 71 percent of the total withdrawn was in Florida (3,020 Mgal/d) and Georgia (785 Mgal/d). The most heavily pumped of the 15 principal aquifers within the sandstone lithologic group was the Cambrian-Ordovician aquifer system (921 Mgal/d), which is in the north-central United States and accounted for 34 percent of the water withdrawn from this lithologic group. Withdrawals for public supply were 1,030 Mgal/d and accounted for 38 percent of the total withdrawals from this lithologic group. Although sandstone aquifers were used as sources of water in 32 States, 45 percent of the total withdrawn from sandstone aquifers was in five States: Minnesota (321 Mgal/d), Wisconsin (319 Mgal/d), Kansas (193 Mgal/d), Illinois (187 Mgal/d), and Pennsylvania (179 Mgal/d). The most heavily pumped of the five principal aquifers and aquifer systems within the sandstone and carbonate-rock lithologic group were the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system (661 Mgal/d) in the south-central United States and the Valley and Ridge aquifers (551 Mgal/d) of the eastern United States, which together accounted for 71 percent of total withdrawals from this lithologic group. Withdrawals from sandstone and carbonate-rock aquifers for public-supply (713 Mgal/d), irrigation (469 Mgal/d), and self-supplied domestic (253 Mgal/d) uses accounted for about 84 percent of the total withdrawals from this lithologic group. Although water was withdrawn from sandstone and carbonate-rock aquifers in 25 States, 65 percent of the total withdrawn was in Texas (651 Mgal/d), Pennsylvania (238 Mgal/d), and Florida (223 Mgal/d).

Circular↗
USGS2025

ShakeAlert®—Communication, education, outreach and technical engagement strategic vision

Executive Summary In 2006, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) began directly supporting ShakeAlert ® research and in 2012 the ShakeAlert demonstration system began testing ( Given and others, 2018 ). The ShakeAlert earthquake early warning (EEW) system is a partnership between the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the three West Coast States (Washington, Oregon, and California) served by the ShakeAlert System, which is part of the larger Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS). With more than 143 million people exposed to potentially damaging shaking in the United States ( Jaiswal and others, 2015 ), earthquakes are a national hazard. Most of our Nation’s earthquake risk is concentrated in the highly populated areas on the active plate tectonic boundaries on the West Coast of the conterminous United States. ShakeAlert is the first public alert system in the United States to provide rapid mass notification of earthquake detection, potentially offering seconds of warning before strong shaking arrives. A few seconds may not seem like much time, but the information in ShakeAlert Messages can be used to trigger automated actions that can prevent injury or death, reduce immediate damage, and speed recovery from earthquakes. The information product issued by the ShakeAlert system is called a ShakeAlert Message and is one of the information products and tools of the ANSS. The ShakeAlert System includes the USGS component, plus the pathways by which ShakeAlert-powered products and (or) services are delivered to end users. Alerts can be delivered to cell phones or be used to trigger automated systems to protect equipment, facilities, and infrastructure, such as slowing or stopping a train. ShakeAlert-powered automated actions can include fire house doors that can be opened to prevent jamming, heavy equipment (for example, trains, elevators, and cranes) that can be automatically stopped or parked in safe positions, and pipeline valves that can be closed to prevent surges and spills. A few seconds of warning also may be sufficient for people to take protective actions, such as drop, cover, and hold on or modified protective actions for a broad range of populations. Advance training may increase the benefit of a speedy response to an alert. Outreach and education about EEW may raise awareness of the overall earthquake threat and how people can best react when they receive an alert or feel shaking. ShakeAlert communication, education, outreach, and technical engagement (CEO&TE) efforts are highly collaborative and essential for the success of the ShakeAlert System. This strategic vision informs how the vast ShakeAlert CEO&TE Community operates and works together. The CEO&TE Community delineates a strategic framework that is intended to set the path for a long-term, sustainable approach to CEO&TE through three focus areas and five priorities. Focus Areas Technical engagement.— The objective of this focus area is to expand and broaden ShakeAlert technical engagement and implementation. External engagement.— This focus area targets engagement in long-term communication, education, and outreach planning, implementation, and evaluation. Internal engagement.— The purpose of this focus area is to build and sustain a robust infrastructure to optimize collaboration, information sharing, and project planning among the community of stakeholders charged with implementing ShakeAlert CEO&TE. Priorities The enumeration of the five priorities listed below does not suggest priority ranking. Public safety, preparedness, and resilience; Technical implementation and engagement; Consistent messaging and communication; Integration with other Federal and State earthquake hazards products; and Educational resources development and dissemination. This strategic vision is a tangible outcome of collaboration among many stakeholders beginning in July 2016. Since then, the work of the ShakeAlert CEO&TE Community has grown into an international effort. The USGS has developed, tested, and implemented a broad spectrum of communication, education, and outreach tools and resources—all of which recognize that seconds matter when it comes to safety and mitigating harm from earthquake hazards. The CEO&TE social science research effort has provided invaluable insights into the ShakeAlert System’s human interface. USGS-licensed technical partners develop, test, and implement real-world applications using ShakeAlert Messages. The success of ShakeAlert CEO&TE efforts is predicated on robust collaboration across numerous agencies, organizations, and groups. As such, this strategic vision outlines a “partnership model” that delineates roles and responsibilities to ensure alignment with focus areas and priorities. The partnership model includes the CEO&TE lead agency (USGS); its principal partners (State agencies and university partners); its implementation partners (for example, technical partners who build systems to deliver ShakeAlert-powered products and (or) services [focus area one]), earthquake education partners who work to increase public preparedness for seismic events (focus area two); and other organizations that work together to enhance the adoption and effectiveness of the ShakeAlert System. These partners collaborate and convene through a variety of working groups and forums, which are also described in this strategic vision and align with focus area three (internal engagement). The CEO&TE Community collaboratively developed its operating principles and a consensus-based, decision-making strategic framework to guide its collective work. Performance metrics are used to continually measure success. Ultimately, the USGS and ShakeAlert CEO&TE Community are advancing the ShakeAlert System that as of the publication of this strategic vision to “provide earthquake early warning for all” serves more than 50 million people.

Circular↗
USGS1952

Index of water-resources records in the Delaware River basin to September 30, 1951

This report is an index of all surface-water, ground-water, and quality-of-water data which have been or are now being collected on a continuous or periodic basis, by the U. S. Geological Survey and the cooperating agencies in the Delaware River basin, to September 30, 1951. The index is divided into two principal sections, the surface-water section relating to streams and the ground-water section to wells and springs. Each section contains an index of records on quality of water. All surface-water data in this report are classified by stream name and state. The ground-water data are classified by state and county inasmuch as most ground-water studies and compilations are made on the basis of a county as a unit. Lists of selected publications relating to surface and ground waters appear at the end of the respective sections. These lists include not only most of the publications issued or prepared by the Geological Survey, but also a representative group of publications prepared elsewhere, particularly reports concerned with large parts of, or the entire, basin. Those Federal, State, and municipal agencies now engaged in cooperative water-resources investigations with the Geological Survey are listed in a section following the ground-water portion of this report. In addition to the data indicated in this index, the Geological Survey has obtained information at many miscellaneous localities throughout the Delaware River basin. Much of this information is available to the public upon application to the Survey field offices, and to facilitate the use of these miscellaneous data, a list of the field offices having

Circular↗
USGS1954

Water resources of the Pittsburgh area, Pennsylvania

The per capita use of water in the Pittsburgh area in 1951 was 2, 000 gallons per day fgpd) or twice the per capita use in Pennsylvania as a whole. An average of about 3, 040 million gallons of water was withdrawn from the streams and from the ground each day. Of this amount, nearly 190 million gallons per day (mgd), or 6 percent, was for domestic public water supply. Industry, including public utilities generating steam for electric energy, used approximately 2, 900 mgd, of which about 42 mgd was purchased from public supply sources. In spite of this tremendous demand for water, a sufficient quantity was available to satisfy the needs of the area without serious difficulty. Acid mine drainage presents the greatest single pollution problem in the Pittsburgh area at the present time (1953) because no practical means has been found for its control. The waters of several of the rivers are strongly acid for this reason. Of the three major rivers in the area, Monongahela River waters have the greatest acid concentration and Allegheny River waters the least. Untreated domestic and industrial wastes are additional sources of stream pollution in the area. Much of the water is hard and corrosive, and occasionally has objectionable color, odor, and taste. The treatment used by public water-supply systems using river water is adequate at all times for removal of water-borne causes of disease. Attention is being concentrated on improving the quality of present supplies rather than developing new supplies from upstream tributaries. Present supplies are being improved by providing treatment facilities for disposal of wastes,, by reduction of acid mine drainage discharged into the streams, and by providing storage to augment low flows. The underground water resources are vitally important to the area. The use of ground water in the Pittsburgh area has doubled in the past two decades and in 1951 more ground water was used in Allegheny County than in any other county in Pennsylvania. On the average about 63 mgd was pumped from the ground, not including 1.5 mgd pumped for air conditioning. Most of the present-day wells in the "Triangle area" of Pittsburgh have large yields and many operate continuously throughout the summer. The result has been a marked seasonal decline in water levels in some parts of the Triangle area, especially near the center of pumping. It appears that the maximum rate of summertime use has been reached in this localized area. Water from wells near rivers often has chemical characteristics similar to those of water from the adjacent stream because the well water is supplied largely by river infiltration. The ground water in the Pittsburgh area is generally more highly mineralized than surface water, harder, and contains higher concentrations of iron and manganese, all the result of solution of aquifer minerals by the water during its passage through the ground. Nevertheless, ground water commonly is less corrosive than surface water, contains little or no suspended sediment, and is free of pathogenic bacteria. Both sediment and bacteria are present in considerable quantities in the river water of this area. Water from wells supplied largely by river infiltration may have a temperature variation throughout a year of as much as 30 to 35 F and a variation in hardness of as much as 130 ppm. Certain types of chemicals having objectionable tastes and odors are not always removed by the natural infiltration of the river water to wells but pathogenic bacteria and sediment are. There is only a small range throughout a year in the temperature and chemical quality of water in individual wells farther from the rivers. Such water is generally harder and contains more dissolved solids than water supplied by river infiltration. There is no immediate likelihood of a shortage of water in the area. Present withdrawals of surface water are spread throughout the major river valleys so that the water returned to the stream after use is available for reuse in essentially undiminished quantity. Ground-water use can be increased manyfold without depleting the supply if advantage is taken of the favorable opportunities for inducing the infiltration of surface water into the alluvial aquifers in the major stream valleys. Ground-water recharge supplied by the rivers will reduce the local flow of the rivers by the amount of the infiltration; however most of the ground water used is discharged to streams near the areas of withdrawal.

Circular↗
USGS1955

Water resources of the Indianapolis area, Indiana

Water used in the Indianapolis area comes from two sources: the White River and tributary streams and the underground reservoirs formed by the underlying glacial drift and limestone. Surface-water sources provide about 60 mgd (million gallons per day) for public supply and an additional 300 mgd is used by private industries and is returned directly to the streams. About 60 mgd is taken from ground-water sources by public water supplies and industries. The total use of water, therefore, is about 420 mgd. The city of Indianapolis and several adjacent urban communities are supplied through the surface-water sources by a private water company, the Indianapolis Water Co. Water is impounded in the Geist Reservoir on Fall Creek. At Broad Ripple, on White River, a low dam is used to divert river water into a feeder canal to a treatment plant. Expansion of the present facilities of this company is in progress. A new reservoir with a capacity about equal to that of Geist Reservoir is being constructed on Cicero Creek, a tributary of the White River. These combined river sources will provide an abundant supply of good water in excess of present demands. This will permit expansion of surface-water use for public, commercial, and industrial supply in the service area of this water company. Industry is the heaviest user of ground water in the area. Of the 56 mgd of ground water pumped in 1952 about 70 percent was used by industry. Agriculture was next with a pumpage of about 15 percent and the remainder or 15· percent was for public and private water supply. The ground water is of relatively uniform composition and temperature. Difficulties in supplying water have occurred and will continue to occur from time to time when demands on ground-water sources are excessively heavy for long periods of time and locally where pumped wells are too closely spaced. Under such conditions ground-water levels decline rapidly and remain depressed for some time. Such a condition may constitute what could be called a water shortage. As the demand for water increases there is need for conservation and wise use of available surface and ground-water supplies.

Indiana↗
USGS2006

usSEABED: Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean (Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands) offshore surficial sediment data release

Over the past 50 years there has been an explosion in scientific interest, research effort and information gathered on the geologic sedimentary character of the United States continental margin. Data and information from thousands of publications have greatly increased our scientific understanding of the geologic origins of the shelf surface but rarely have those data been combined and integrated. This publication is the first release of the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean (Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands) coastal and offshore data from the usSEABED database. The report contains a compilation of published and previously unpublished sediment texture and other geologic data about the sea floor from diverse sources. usSEABED is an innovative database system developed to bring assorted data together in a unified database. The dbSEABED system is used to process the data. Examples of maps displaying attributes such as grain size and sediment color are included. This database contains information that is a scientific foundation for the USGS Marine Aggregate Resources and Processes Assessment and Benthic Habitats projects, and will be useful to the marine science community for other studies of the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean continental margins. This publication is divided into ten sections: Home, Introduction, Content, usSEABED (data), dbSEABED (processing), Data Catalog, References, Contacts, Acknowledgments and Frequently Asked Questions. Use the navigation bar on the left to navigate to specific sections of this report. Underlined topics throughout the publication are links to more information. Links to specific and detailed information on processing and those to pages outside this report will open in a new browser window.

Caribbean Sea, Gulf of Mexico↗
USGS2006

usSEABED: Pacific Coast (California, Oregon, Washington) Offshore Surficial-Sediment Data Release, version 1

Over the past 50 years there has been an explosion in scientific interest, research effort, and information gathered on the geologic sedimentary character of the continental margin of the United States. Data and information from thousands of publications have greatly increased our scientific understanding of the geologic origins of the margin surface but rarely have those data been combined and integrated. This publication is the first release of the Pacific coast data from the usSEABED database. The report contains a compilation of published and unpublished sediment texture and other geologic data about the sea floor from diverse sources. usSEABED is an innovative database system developed to unify assorted data, with the data processed by the dbSEABED system. Examples of maps displaying attributes such as grain size and sediment color are included. This database contains information that is a scientific foundation for the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Sea floor Mapping and Benthic Habitats project and the Marine Aggregate Resources and Processes assessment project, and will be useful to the marine science community for other studies of the Pacific coast continental margin. The publication is divided into 10 sections: Home, Introduction, Content, usSEABED (data), dbSEABED (processing), Data Catalog, References, Contacts, Acknowledgments, and Frequently Asked Questions. Use the navigation bar on the left to navigate to specific sections of this report. Underlined topics throughout the publication are links to more information. Links to specific and detailed information on processing and to those to pages outside this report will open in a new browser window.

California, Oregon, Washington↗
USGS2007

ASTER-Derived 30-Meter-Resolution Digital Elevation Models of Afghanistan

INTRODUCTION The Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) is an imaging instrument aboard the Terra satellite, launched on December 19, 1999, as part of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Earth Observing System (EOS). The ASTER sensor consists of three subsystems: the visible and near infrared (VNIR), the shortwave infrared (SWIR), and the thermal infrared (TIR), each with a different spatial resolution (VNIR, 15 meters; SWIR, 30 meters, TIR 90 meters). The VNIR system has the capability to generate along-track stereo images that can be used to create digital elevation models (DEMs) at 30-meter resolution. Currently, the only available DEM dataset for Afghanistan is the 90-meter-resolution Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) data. This dataset is appropriate for macroscale DEM analysis and mapping. However, ASTER provides a low cost opportunity to generate higher resolution data. For this publication, study areas were identified around populated areas and areas where higher resolution elevation data were desired to assist in natural resource assessments. The higher resolution fidelity of these DEMs can also be used for other terrain analysis including landform classification and geologic structure analysis. For this publication, ASTER scenes were processed and mosaicked to generate 36 DEMs which were created and extracted using PCI Geomatics' OrthoEngine 3D Stereo software. The ASTER images were geographically registered to Landsat data with at least 15 accurate and well distributed ground control points with a root mean square error (RMSE) of less that one pixel (15 meters). An elevation value was then assigned to each ground control point by extracting the elevation from the 90-meter SRTM data. The 36 derived DEMs demonstrate that the software correlated on nearly flat surfaces and smooth slopes accurately. Larger errors occur in cloudy and snow-covered areas, lakes, areas with steep slopes, and southeastern-facing slopes. In these areas, holes, large pits, and spikes were generated by the software during the correlation process and the automatic interpolation method. To eliminate these problems, overlapping DEMs were generated and filtered using a progressive morphologic filter. The quadrangles used to delineate the DEMs in the publication were derived from the Afghan Geodesy and Cartography Head Office's (AGCHO) 1:100,000-scale maps series quadrangles. Each DEM was clipped and assigned a name according to the associated AGCHO quadrangle name. The geospatial data included in this publication are intended to be used with any GIS software packages including, but not limited to, ESRI's ArcGIS and ERDAS IMAGINE.

Data Series↗
USGS2009

Groundwater quality data in the Mojave study unit, 2008: Results from the California GAMA Program

Groundwater quality in the approximately 1,500 square-mile Mojave (MOJO) study unit was investigated from February to April 2008, as part of the Priority Basin Project of the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The GAMA Priority Basin Project was developed in response to the Groundwater Quality Monitoring Act of 2001 and is being conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). MOJO was the 23rd of 37 study units to be sampled as part of the GAMA Priority Basin Project. The MOJO study was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of the quality of untreated ground water used for public water supplies within MOJO, and to facilitate statistically consistent comparisons of groundwater quality throughout California. Samples were collected from 59 wells in San Bernardino and Los Angeles Counties. Fifty-two of the wells were selected using a spatially distributed, randomized grid-based method to provide statistical representation of the study area (grid wells), and seven were selected to aid in evaluation of specific water-quality issues (understanding wells). The groundwater samples were analyzed for a large number of organic constituents [volatile organic compounds (VOCs), pesticides and pesticide degradates, and pharmaceutical compounds], constituents of special interest (perchlorate and N-nitrosodimethylamine [NDMA]) naturally occurring inorganic constituents (nutrients, dissolved organic carbon [DOC], major and minor ions, silica, total dissolved solids [TDS], and trace elements), and radioactive constituents (gross alpha and gross beta radioactivity, radium isotopes, and radon-222). Naturally occurring isotopes (stable isotopes of hydrogen, oxygen, and carbon, stable isotopes of nitrogen and oxygen in nitrate, and activities of tritium and carbon-14), and dissolved noble gases also were measured to help identify the sources and ages of the sampled ground water. In total, over 230 constituents and water-quality indicators (field parameters) were investigated. Three types of quality-control samples (blanks, replicates, and matrix spikes) each were collected at approximately 5–8 percent of the wells, and the results for these samples were used to evaluate the quality of the data for the groundwater samples. Field blanks rarely contained detectable concentrations of any constituent, suggesting that contamination was not a significant source of bias in the data for the groundwater samples. Differences between replicate samples generally were within acceptable ranges, indicating acceptable analytical reproducibility. Matrix spike recoveries were within acceptable ranges for most compounds. This study did not attempt to evaluate the quality of water delivered to consumers; after withdrawal from the ground, untreated groundwater typically is treated, disinfected, or blended with other waters to maintain water quality. Regulatory thresholds apply to water that is served to the consumer, not to untreated ground water. However, to provide some context for the results, concentrations of constituents measured in the untreated ground water were compared with regulatory and non-regulatory health-based thresholds established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and California Department of Public Health (CDPH) and thresholds established for aesthetic and technical concerns by CDPH. Comparisons between data collected for this study and thresholds for drinking-water are for illustrative purposes only, and are not indicative of compliance or non-compliance with those thresholds. Most constituents that were detected in groundwater samples in the 59 wells in MOJO were found at concentrations below drinking-water thresholds. In MOJO’s 52 grid wells, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were detected in 40 percent of the wells, and pesticides and pesticide degradates were detected in 23 percent of the grid wells. Results for health-based thresholds in MOJO grid wells showed that all of the detections of organic compounds in samples from MOJO grid wells were below health-based thresholds, with the exception of a single detection of NDMA above the California Department of Public Health notification level (NL-CA). Trace elements and radioactive constituents were sampled for at 19 MOJO grid wells and most detections were below health-based thresholds. Exceptions include: six detections of arsenic above the USEPA maximum contaminant level (MCL-US), two detections of boron and one detection of vanadium above the NL-CA, one detection each of molybdenum and strontium that were above the USEPA lifetime health advisory level (HAL-US), and one detection of fluoride just above the MCL-CA of 2 µg/L. Most detections of radioactive constituents in the MOJO grid wells were below health-based thresholds, with the exception of one detection of gross alpha radioactivity (72-hour count and 30-day count) above the MCL-CA, and 17 grid wells (of 19 sampled) that had activities of radon-222 above the proposed MCL-US of 300 pCi/L, but all were below the proposed alternative MCL-US of 4,000 pCi/L. All of the samples collected from the 19 MOJO grid wells for trace elements, and most of the samples for major ions and total dissolved solids (TDS), had measured concentrations below the non-enforceable thresholds set for aesthetic concerns. Four grid wells had TDS concentrations above the California Department of Public Health secondary maximum contaminant level (SMCL-CA) recommended threshold of 500 mg/L, and three of these wells were also above the SMCL-CA upper threshold of 1,000 mg/L. Four grid wells (of 19 sampled) had sulfate measured at concentrations above the recommended SMCL-CA threshold of 250 mg/L, and one of these detections was also above the upper SMCL-CA threshold of 500 mg/L. One grid well had chloride levels at a concentration above the upper SMCL-CA threshold of 500 mg/L. Eleven grid wells (of 52 sampled) had pH values outside of the SMCL-US range for pH.

California↗