Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Management Science”

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 955 records · Page 53Linked to original sources
USGS2004

The U.S. Geological Survey Library

Established in 1879, to build and organize a collection of scientific materials in the earth sciences, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Library is the largest earth sciences collection in the world. The USGS Library System is managed by the Geographic Information Office (GIO), Information Policy and Services Office, and includes four libraries in Reston, Va., Denver, Colo., Menlo Park, Calif., and Flagstaff, Ariz. The library holds over one million books and journals, 700,000 maps, 370,000 microforms, 270,000 pamphlets, and 250,000 photographs. In addition to the four libraries managed by the GIO, the USGS has smaller libraries in other locations with collections closely related to the specialized research of their local USGS scientists. The USGS Library System supports the research of USGS scientists by providing access to worldwide information resources. While continuing to build and maintain the large collections of maps, books, and periodicals, the USGS Library system is evolving from a traditional library to a more "virtual library." USGS employees, wherever they are located, have desktop access to an increasing wealth of electronic resources 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2010

Facts About Invasive Bighead and Silver Carps

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists at the Columbia Environmental Research Center (CERC), Columbia, Missouri, carry out basic and applied research on the ecology of invasive fishes in the Missouri and Mississippi river basins. Emphasis is placed on improving understanding of the life cycles of bighead and silver carp to provide information needed to manage these aggressively invasive species. USGS scientists collaborate with Federal and State management agencies and universities, nationally and internationally, to fill critical science information gaps.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2011

Enhancement of USGS scientific investigations in Texas by using geophysical techniques, 2005-10

Geophysical techniques are an increasingly important tool for scientific investigations, environmental planning, and resource management. During 2005-10 the U.S. Geological Survey Texas Water Science Center greatly expanded its capabilities of using surface and borehole geophysical techniques to gain insights into how groundwater systems work and the occurrence and distribution of certain contaminants. Geophysical techniques provide a relatively quick and inexpensive means to characterize the subsurface hydrology and lithology.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2015

USGS Arctic Science Strategy

The United States is one of eight Arctic nations responsible for the stewardship of a polar region undergoing dramatic environmental, social, and economic changes. Although warming and cooling cycles have occurred over millennia in the Arctic region, the current warming trend is unlike anything recorded previously and is affecting the region faster than any other place on Earth, bringing dramatic reductions in sea ice extent, altered weather, and thawing permafrost. Implications of these changes include rapid coastal erosion threatening villages and critical infrastructure, potentially significant effects on subsistence activities and cultural resources, changes to wildlife habitat, increased greenhouse-gas emissions from thawing permafrost, threat of invasive species, and opening of the Arctic Ocean to oil and gas exploration and increased shipping. The Arctic science portfolio of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and its response to climate-related changes focuses on landscapescale ecosystem and natural resource issues and provides scientific underpinning for understanding the physical processes that shape the Arctic. The science conducted by the USGS informs the Nation's resource management policies and improves the stewardship of the Arctic Region.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2023

U.S. Geological Survey Colorado Water Science Center postcard

The U.S. Geological Survey Colorado Water Science Center provides timely, high-quality science information on Colorado’s water resources to help planners, managers, and others to make the decisions necessary for the use of these limited and shared resources throughout the State.

Colorado↗
USGS2015

Data categories for marine planning

The U.S. National Ocean Policy calls for a science- and ecosystem-based approach to comprehensive planning and management of human activities and their impacts on America’s oceans. The Ocean Community in Data.gov is an outcome of 2010–2011 work by an interagency working group charged with designing a national information management system to support ocean planning. Within the working group, a smaller team developed a list of the data categories specifically relevant to marine planning. This set of categories is an important consensus statement of the breadth of information types required for ocean planning from a national, multidisciplinary perspective. Although the categories were described in a working document in 2011, they have not yet been fully implemented explicitly in online services or geospatial metadata, in part because authoritative definitions were not created formally. This document describes the purpose of the data categories, provides definitions, and identifies relations among the categories and between the categories and external standards. It is intended to be used by ocean data providers, managers, and users in order to provide a transparent and consistent framework for organizing and describing complex information about marine ecosystems and their connections to humans.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2019

Geostatistical estimation of the bottom altitude and thickness of the Mississippi River Valley alluvial aquifer

The Mississippi River Valley alluvial aquifer (MRVA) caps a shallow system of aquifers and confining units in the Mississippi Alluvial Plain (MAP) that extends across 45,000 square miles of the midwestern and southern United States from Illinois to Louisiana. Irrigation water from the MRVA is required to sustain extensive crop production, which has resulted in groundwater-level declines since the late 1920s equal to nearly half of its thickness and in reduced baseflow of streams. Increased groundwater withdrawal for irrigation is expected to continue and threatens complete and irreversible aquifer dewatering (depletion). The exact amount of dewatering in the MRVA is uncertain because its vertical extent is poorly defined and the effects of groundwater withdrawal on the aquifer are not well understood. To provide stakeholders and managers with information and tools that promote understanding of the hydrogeologic framework of the MAP extent and its role in water-resource management, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Water Availability and Use Science Program has funded a 5-year effort to assess groundwater availability and project future sustainability of water resources. Part of this study involves mapping the bottom altitude and thickness of the aquifer by using compilations of hydrogeologic data and applications of geostatistical analytics. Results of this mapping effort, presented here, are intended to enhance characterization of the shallow hydrogeologic framework and direct future airborne, ground-based, and waterborne geophysical surveys. Data used in support of the findings presented in this report are available as a USGS data release ( https://doi.org/10.5066/P9D9XR5F ).

Scientific Investigations Map↗
USGS2000

Methods of rating unsaturated zone and watershed characteristics of public water supplies in North Carolina

Overlay and index methods were derived for rating the unsaturated zone and watershed characteristics for use by the State of North Carolina in assessing more than 11,000 public water-supply wells and approximately 245 public surface-water intakes. The rating of the unsaturated zone and watershed characteristics represents a practical and effective means of assessing part of the inherent vulnerability of water supplies to potential contamination. Factors that influence the inherent vulnerability of the drinking water supply to potential contamination were selected and assigned ratings (on a scale of 1 to 10) to cover the possible range of values in North Carolina. These factors were assigned weights of 1, 2, or 3 to reflect their relative influence on the inherent vulnerability of the drinking water supply. The factor values were obtained from Geographic Information System data layers, and were transformed into grids having 60-meter by 60-meter cells, with each cell being assigned a value. Identification of factors, the development of ratings for each, and assignment of weights were based on (1) a literature search, which included examination of potential factors and their effects on the drinking water; and (2) consultation with experts in the science and engineering of hydrology, geology, forestry, agriculture, and water management. Factors selected for rating the inherent vulnerability of the unsaturated zone are vertical hydraulic conductance, land-surface slope, land cover, and land use. Vertical hydraulic conductance is a measure of the capacity of unsaturated material to transmit water. Land-surface slope influences whether precipitation runs off land surfaces or infiltrates into the subsurface. Land cover, the physical overlay of the land surface, influences the amount of precipitation that becomes overland flow or infiltrates into the subsurface. Land use describes activities that occur on the land surface and influence the potential generation of nonpoint-source contamination. Factors selected for rating the watershed characteristics upstream from surface-water intakes are average annual precipitation, land-surface slope, land cover, land use, and ground-water contribution. The average annual precipitation represents the mass of water that becomes available for transport in a watershed. Land-surface slope, land cover, and land use have similar influences in watersheds as those identified for the unsaturated zone. Ground-water contribution represents the part of streamflow that is derived from ground-water discharge.

North Carolina↗
USGS2009

Discussion on remote sensing for aquatic monitoring

The special session on Remote Sensing for Aquatic Resource Monitoring concluded with an expert panel discussion. Panel members were Jennifer Bountry (hydraulic engineer, Bureau of Reclamation), Mimi D’Iorio (GIS analyst and database manager, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), Russ Faux (president, Watershed Sciences, Inc.), Steve Lanigan (team leader, Aquatic and Riparian Effectiveness Monitoring Program, U.S. Forest Service), and Amar Nayegandhi (computer scientist, Jacobs Technology, contracted to U.S. Geological Survey). The panel was moderated by Ralph Haugerud (geologist, U.S. Geological Survey) and there were significant contributions from the audience. The dialogue is summarized below in question and answer format. This summary is followed by discussion of what we learned in the course of the special session and identification of some next steps for the Pacific Northwest aquatic monitoring community.

PNAMP Special Publication↗
USGS2024

Evaluation and review of best management practices for the reduction of polychlorinated biphenyls to the Chesapeake Bay

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) continue to impact the environment due to historic and ongoing anthropogenic sources (for example, industrial and agricultural), despite their ban. Contaminated stormwater has been identified as a vector for PCB transport to many estuaries impaired by PCBs. Management of these regulated discharges is typically achieved by best management practices (BMPs). This review focuses on PCB reduction practices and BMPs to assist management decision making and provide information on the current state of the science. Studies have quantitatively demonstrated the efficacy of green infrastructure BMPs and gray infrastructure improvements to reduce PCB loads, and other studies have demonstrated qualitative reductions for other BMP types. This review also highlights the disconnect between PCB load reduction and PCB bioavailability when selecting a remediation strategy. Additionally, the review evaluates modeling approaches to assess PCB load reduction to inform management decisions and suggests why there are still significant barriers to implementation.

Chesapeake Bay watershed↗
USGS2006

History of the Fort Collins Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey

The U.S. Geological Survey’s Fort Collins Science Center ("the Center") has been a nucleus of research, technology development, and associated scientific activities within the Department of the Interior for more than 30 years. The Center’s historical activities are deeply rooted in federal biological resources research and its supporting disciplines, particularly as they relate to the needs of the U.S. Department of the Interior and its resource management agencies. The organizational framework and activities of the Center have changed and adapted over the years in response to shifts in the scientific issues and challenges facing the U.S. Department of the Interior and with the development of new strategies to meet these challenges. Thus, the history of the Center has been dynamic. The Center has been nested within the U.S. Geological Survey since 1996. From 1993 to 1996 the Center was a major unit of the National Biological Service (named the National Biological Survey at its inception). This was a period of great organizational flux. During that time the Center comprised multiple field stations and science functions that prior to 1993 had been scattered among the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the National Park Service, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In 1993, certain biological research components of these agencies were assigned to join with the National Ecology Research Center, formerly one of the major research and development hubs of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This was the year when biological resources research in the U.S. Department of the Interior was consolidated by the Secretary of the Interior, who in an April 1993 memo explaining his intentions wrote, "Our Department has, without doubt, the best biologists in the world." Soon after formation of the new agency, the Center was re-named the Midcontinent Ecological Science Center, reflecting its geographic location within the new Midcontinent administrative region of the National Biological Service (the other three original administrative regions were the eastern, western, and southern). The change in name to the Fort Collins Science Center took place in 2002, soon after the center moved to new facilities on the Colorado State University Natural Resources Research Campus. At various times during the period when it was part of the National Biological Service (1993–96), the Center served as the administrative and programmatic home base for a wide number of science activities in numerous Western states (table 1). This reflected the previous fragmentation of biological and related science efforts across resource management agencies in the U.S. Department of the Interior. The organization of the 2 Center within the National Biological Service was a manifestation of the desire of the Secretary of the Interior to consolidate its biological science activities in administratively independent entities that would ensure that the science retained its objectivity. Congress later recognized the need to maintain a hierarchical independence between biological science and resource management in the Department. However, Congress also saw that the U.S. Geological Survey, with its long history of objective science support to the nation in geology, water resources, geography, and remote sensing, was a suitable alternative home for these biological science functions. Thus, in 1996 Congress transferred the biological resources functions of the National Biological Service to the U.S. Geological Survey. Detailed overviews and opinions about the history and policy issues surrounding the formation and subsequent fate of the National Biological Service can be found elsewhere (for example Cohn, 1993, 2005; Kaufman, 1993; Kreeger, 1994; Pulliam, 1995, 1998a,b; Reichhardt, 1994; Wagner, 1999)

Open-File Report↗
USGS2017

The Wetland and Aquatic Research Center strategic science plan

Introduction The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Wetland and Aquatic Research Center (WARC) has two primary locations (Gainesville, Florida, and Lafayette, Louisiana) and field stations throughout the southeastern United States and Caribbean. WARC’s roots are in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Park Service research units that were brought into the USGS as the Biological Research Division in 1996. Founded in 2015, WARC was created from the merger of two long-standing USGS biology science Centers—the Southeast Ecological Science Center and the National Wetlands Research Center—to bring together expertise in biology, ecology, landscape science, geospatial applications, and decision support in order to address issues nationally and internationally. WARC scientists apply their expertise to a variety of wetland and aquatic research and monitoring issues that require coordinated, integrated efforts to better understand natural environments. By increasing basic understanding of the biology of important species and broader ecological and physiological processes, this research provides information to policymakers and aids managers in their stewardship of natural resources and in regulatory functions. This strategic science plan (SSP) was developed to guide WARC research during the next 5–10 years in support of Department of the Interior (DOI) partnering bureaus such as the USFWS, the National Park Service, and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, as well as other Federal, State, and local natural resource management agencies. The SSP demonstrates the alignment of the WARC goals with the USGS mission areas, associated programs, and other DOI initiatives. The SSP is necessary for workforce planning and, as such, will be used as a guide for future needs for personnel. The SSP also will be instrumental in developing internal funding priorities and in promoting WARC’s capabilities to both external cooperators and other groups within the USGS.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2010

Developing an Analytical Framework: Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Decision Making - Proceedings of a Workshop

The analytical framework for understanding ecosystem services in conservation, resource management, and development decisions is multidisciplinary, encompassing a combination of the natural and social sciences. This report summarizes a workshop on 'Developing an Analytical Framework: Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Decision Making,' which focused on the analytical process and on identifying research priorities for assessing ecosystem services, their production and use, their spatial and temporal characteristics, their relationship with natural systems, and their interdependencies. Attendees discussed research directions and solutions to key challenges in developing the analytical framework. The discussion was divided into two sessions: (1) the measurement framework: quantities and values, and (2) the spatial framework: mapping and spatial relationships. This workshop was the second of three preconference workshops associated with ACES 2008 (A Conference on Ecosystem Services): Using Science for Decision Making in Dynamic Systems. These three workshops were designed to explore the ACES 2008 theme on decision making and how the concept of ecosystem services can be more effectively incorporated into conservation, restoration, resource management, and development decisions. Preconference workshop 1, 'Developing a Vision: Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Decision Making,' was held on April 15, 2008, in Cambridge, MA. In preconference workshop 1, participants addressed what would have to happen to make ecosystem services be used more routinely and effectively in conservation, restoration, resource management, and development decisions, and they identified some key challenges in developing the analytical framework. Preconference workshop 3, 'Developing an Institutional Framework: Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Decision Making,' was held on October 30, 2008, in Albuquerque, NM; participants examined the relationship between the institutional framework and the use of ecosystem services in decision making.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2010

Southeast Ecological Science Center

Aquatic ecosystems, from deep sea reefs and coastal marshes to freshwater springs and wetlands, are home to diverse assemblages of life. These commercially and ecologically important systems are part of our national heritage, and are often treasured places or refuges that protect rare or threatened species. In the water-rich Southeastern United States, managers face the challenge of understanding how water and land use affect the region's aquatic life. The Southeast Ecological Science Center (SESC) helps address that challenge by providing objective science that can be used to evaluate proposed actions and develop management strategies.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2017

Implementing the 2012 North American Waterfowl Management Plan revision: Populations, habitat, and people

The North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) has established a model for wildlife conservation planning over the last 3 decades. Management at a continental scale, leveraged funding, regional partnerships, and a strong science basis have been notable features. Periodic updates to the NAWMP occurred since implementation in 1986; however, a fundamental revision was accomplished in 2012 after extensive stakeholder engagement. An explicit fundamental goal for waterfowl conservation supporters was added in 2012, complementing existing goals for sustainable populations and sufficient habitat found in previous updates. We present a synopsis of progress toward implementation of the 2012 NAWMP and challenge the waterfowl management community to continue with meaningful steps toward achieving NAWMP goals. Adding goals and objectives for supporters increases potential relevance of NAWMP; however, it also presents a level of complexity that was not entirely anticipated. Additionally, the 2012 NAWMP recognized that traditional support from waterfowl hunters alone will not be sufficient to support waterfowl conservation in the future. Simultaneous consideration of multiple objectives, although implicit before, now is a specific focus for habitat and harvest management affecting hunters and other users of the waterfowl resource. The waterfowl management community is faced with revisiting objectives and management actions related to harvest regulations, landscape priorities, habitat conservation, and public engagement to garner broader support. These persistent management challenges are tangible and relevant candidates for greater integration. Ultimately, the structures and processes supporting waterfowl management also will need to be reconsidered.

Journal of Wildlife Management↗
USGS2017

Cross-scale phenological data integration to benefit resource management and monitoring

Climate change is presenting new challenges for natural resource managers charged with maintaining sustainable ecosystems and landscapes. Phenology, a branch of science dealing with seasonal natural phenomena (bird migration or plant flowering in response to weather changes, for example), bridges the gap between the biosphere and the climate system. Phenological processes operate across scales that span orders of magnitude—from leaf to globe and from days to seasons—making phenology ideally suited to multiscale, multiplatform data integration and delivery of information at spatial and temporal scales suitable to inform resource management decisions. A workshop report: Workshop held June 2016 to investigate opportunities and challenges facing multi-scale, multi-platform integration of phenological data to support natural resource management decision-making.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2007

A Science Plan for a Comprehensive Regional Assessment of the Atlantic Coastal Plain Aquifer System in Maryland

The Maryland Coastal Plain region is, at present, largely dependent upon ground water for its water supply. Decades of increasing pumpage have caused ground-water levels in parts of the Maryland Coastal Plain to decline by as much as 2 feet per year in some areas of southern Maryland. Continued declines at this rate could affect the long-term sustainability of ground-water resources in Maryland's heavily populated Coastal Plain communities and the agricultural industry of the Eastern Shore. In response to a recommendation in 2004 by the Advisory Committee on the Management and Protection of the State's Water Resources, the Maryland Geological Survey and the U.S. Geological Survey have developed a science plan for a comprehensive assessment that will provide new scientific information and new data management and analysis tools for the State to use in allocating ground water in the Coastal Plain. The comprehensive assessment has five goals aimed at improving the current information and tools used to understand the resource potential of the aquifer system: (1) document the geologic and hydrologic characteristics of the aquifer system in the Maryland Coastal Plain and appropriate areas of adjacent states; (2) conduct detailed studies of the regional ground-water-flow system and water budget for the aquifer system; (3) improve documentation of patterns of water quality in all Coastal Plain aquifers, including the distribution of saltwater; (4) enhance ground-water-level, streamflow, and water-quality-monitoring networks in the Maryland Coastal Plain; and (5) develop science-based tools to facilitate sound management of the ground-water resources in the Maryland Coastal Plain. The assessment, as designed, will be conducted in three phases and if fully implemented, is expected to take 7 to 8 years to complete. Phase I, which was initiated in January 2006, is an effort to assemble all the information and investigation tools needed to do a more comprehensive assessment of the aquifer system. The work will include updating the hydrogeologic framework, developing a Geographic Information System-based aquifer information system, refinement of water-use information, assessment of existing water-quality data, and development of detailed plans for ground-water-flow and management models. Phase II is an intensive study phase during which a regional ground-water-flow model will be developed and calibrated for the entire region of Maryland in the Atlantic Coastal Plain as well as appropriate areas of Delaware and Virginia. The model will be used to simulate flow and water levels in the aquifer system and to study the water budget of the system. The model analysis will be based on published information but will be supplemented with field investigations of recharge and leakage in the aquifer system. Localized and finely discretized ground-water-flow models that are embedded in the regional model will be developed for selected areas of heavy withdrawals. Other modeling studies will be conducted to better understand flow in the unconfined parts of the aquifer system and to support the recharge studies. Phase II will also include selected water-quality studies and a study to determine how hydrologic and water-quality-monitoring networks need to be enhanced to appropriately assess the sustainability of the Coastal Plain aquifer system. Phase III will be largely devoted to the development and application of a ground-water optimization model. This model will be linked to the ground-water-flow model to create a model package that can be used to test different water-management scenarios. The management criteria that will be used to develop these scenarios will be determined in consultation with a variety of state and local stakeholders and policy makers in Phases I and II of the assessment. The development of the aquifer information system is a key component of the assessment. The system will store all relevant aquifer data

Open-File Report↗
USGS2004

Managing National Wildlife Refuges for historic or non-historic conditions: Determining the role of the refuge in the ecosystem

The 1997 Refuge Improvement Act mandates that National Wildlife Refuges (NWR) develop Comprehensive Conservation Plans and that the Refuge System be administered in a manner that ensures the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the System are maintained. Refuges must determine their role in the landscape and decide if refuge lands will be managed for historic or non-historic conditions. This decision should be based on an understanding of the Refuge Purpose and supported by available science. Case studies for Sherburne NWR and Bosque del Apache NWR illustrate two possible approaches to determining future management.

Natural Resources Journal↗