Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Information Services and Use”

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 1,063 records · Page 59Linked to original sources
USGS1999

Spatial geologic data model for the Gunnison, Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre National Forests mineral resource assessment area, southwestern Colorado and digital data for the Leadville, Montrose, Durango, and Colorado parts of the Grand Junction, Moab, and Cortez 1° x 2° geologic maps

The digital geologic and geographic information system (GIS) data presented here were prepared to aid in Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, Gunnison National Forest (GMUG) mineral resource assessment Project studies by the U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Resource Program. The goals of the GMUG Project is to provide mineral resource data and an assessment for undiscovered mineral resources in U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) lands in southwestern Colorado. The Project area covers a large region in southwestern Colorado that is bounded by latitudes 37o 45’ to 39o 30’ north and longitudes 106o to 109o west. The study area is covered by all or parts of six 1o x2o topographic and quadrangle geologic maps, which include geologic maps for the Leadville (Tweto and others, 1978), Montrose (Tweto and others, 1976), Durango (Steven and others, 1974), Grand Junction (Cashion, 1973), Moab (Williams, 1976), and Cortez (Haynes and others, 1972) quadrangles. These geologic maps were used inasmuch as a complete remapping and compilation effort for this study area was beyond the scope of the Project.

Colorado↗
USGS2022

Integrating principles and tools of decision science into value-driven watershed planning for compensatory mitigation

Several environmental policies strive to restore impaired ecosystems and could benefit from a consistent and transparent process — co-developed with key stakeholders — to prioritize impaired ecosystems for restoration activities. The Clean Water Act, for example, establishes reallocation mechanisms to transfer ecosystem services from sites of disturbance to compensation sites to offset aquatic resource functions that are unavoidably lost through land development. However, planning for the prioritization of compensatory mitigation areas is often hampered by decision-making processes that fall into a myopic decision frame because they are not co-produced with stakeholders. In this study, we partnered with domain experts from the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS) to co-develop a real-world decision framework to prioritize catchments by potential for the development of mitigation projects following principles of a structured decision-making process and knowledge co-production. Following an iterative decision analysis cycle, domain experts revised foundational components of the decision framework and progressively added complexity and realism as they gained additional insights or more information became available. Through the course of facilitated in-person and remote interactions, the co-development of a decision framework produced three main ‘breakthroughs’ from the perspective of the stakeholder group: a) recognition of the problem as a multi-objective decision driven by several values in addition to biogeophysical goals (e.g., functional uplift; restoring or enhancing lost functionality of ecosystems), b) that the decision comprises a linked and sequential planning-to-implementation process, and c) future risk associated with land-use and climate change must be considered. We also present an interactive tool for ‘on-the-fly’ assessment of alternatives and tradeoff analysis, allowing domain experts to quickly test, react to, and revise prioritization strategies. The decision framework described in this study is not limited to the prioritization of compensatory mitigation activities across North Carolina, but rather serves as a framework to prioritize a wide range of restoration, conservation, and resource allocation activities in similar environmental contexts across the nation.

Ecological Applications↗
USGS2019

Topographic mapping evolution: From field and photogrammetric data collection to GIS production and Linked Open Data

Whither the topographic map? Topographic mapping historically has been approached as a map factory operation through the period 1879-1990. During this time, data were field and photogrammetrically collected; cartographically verified and annotated creating a compilation manuscript; further edited, generalized, symbolized, and produced as a graphic output product using lithography, or more recently, through digital means. Adoption of geographic information systems (GIS) as the primary production process for topographic maps, including digital database preparation (1975-2000) and product generation operations (2001-present), has led to faster and more standardized production in a semi-automated process. However, the topographic product has remained the same static graphic. Global Navigation Systems (GNS) began in the post 1990s, led to publicly and commercially produced location-based information traditionally provided by surveyors for topographic maps. Advances in GIS technology, computer processing, memory, and storage devices, along with GNS spawned new location systems and led to ubiquitous, consumer-based cartography through commercial entities on the World Wide Web (Web). This global availability of cartography has provided consumer access and the ability to produce topographic types of map products previously supplied only by traditional National Mapping Agencies (NMAs). Information provided by location-based services made available through connected databases has led to completely new business models based on cartography and geospatial data. A new form of topographic map as an interactive, linked knowledge base is now being created. The appearance of the Semantic Web and Linked Open Data allows the map to become an interactive knowledge base. In this current theory and implementation of topographic mapping, the map is a graphics-based interface to a triplestore knowledge base which includes a topographic feature ontology, semantics and relations, and instance data with geometry and topology available. The topographic map graphic becomes an interactive link to the knowledge base and additional linked data through the Linked Open Data cloud.

Cartographic Journal↗
USGS2005

Attitudinal survey component of the study Quantity, quality, and support for research in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: An organizational assessment : Report of methods and frequencies

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is responsible for managing the Nation’s fish and wildlife resources so that these trust resources are preserved for the present and future use and enjoyment of the citizens of the United States. The FWS achieves this mission by managing many programs. These include the national system of refuges and fish hatcheries, Fish and Wildlife Management Assistance Offices, migratory birds program, law enforcement, and working with tribal, state, and other Federal agencies to ensure protection of threatened and endangered species. Another role of the FWS is consulting with tribal, state, and other Federal agencies and private sector interests on the best conservation management practices consistent with Federal law. Each of these activities requires a workforce that is recognized for its professionalism, dedication to public service, and command of expert knowledge. Recognition for expert knowledge in fish and wildlife conservation is demonstrated, in part, when FWS personnel direct, conduct, or report research that is well-designed to answer questions of importance for natural resource management. The data reported in this document are one part of a three-part study of the status of organizational support for research in FWS, which was commissioned by the Directorate of the FWS. Funding for this study was provided by the FWS, and the Science Support Program of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). In 1994, the biological research functions of the FWS were transferred to the National Biological Survey, and subsequently into the USGS. This transfer was principally accomplished by moving whole research units from one agency to another. The result was that some employees whose positions were involved with research were not transferred. In addition, some research, information, and management needs of the FWS have continued to be met by studies conducted within the FWS itself. Although the FWS relies on the USGS and others for most basic research investigations, the FWS also conducts its own studies to meet management needs. Because it is vital for FWS employees to be able to conduct such tactical and applied research tasks in a timely manner, the agency must promote the culture necessary to support and encourage these activities. Such research activities are spread widely across the various programs of the FWS, and there is presently no collective, formal, or systematic record of planned or existing research activities. In commissioning this organizational assessment research, the Directorate of the FWS recognized that it would be to the advantage of the agency to more fully understand its research capacity. To develop a clearer picture of the nature, extent, quality, and degree of administrative support available for conducting research within the FWS, investigations have been undertaken to: 1. identify positions in the FWS that may include, in whole or in part, a component of scientific research; 2. identify organizational units within the FWS that may conduct research as a significant portion of their mission; and 3. assess the attitudes of employees and managers about the obstacles and opportunities for scientific research existing within the FWS by using a scaled-response survey instrument. The findings presented in this report represent the basic results derived from the attitude assessment survey conducted in the last quarter of 2004. The findings set forth in this report are the frequency distributions for each question in the survey instrument for all respondents. The only statistics provided are descriptive in character - namely, means and associated standard deviations.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2020

Using remote sensing products to predict recovery of vegetation across space and time following energy development

Using localized studies to understand how ecosystems recover can create uncertainty in recovery predictions across landscapes. Large archives of remote sensing data offer opportunities for quantifying the spatial and temporal factors influencing recovery at broad scales and predicting recovery. For example, energy production is a widespread and expanding land use among many semi-arid ecosystems of the Western United States dominated by sagebrush ( Artemisia spp.), a keystone species providing a variety of ecological services. With remotely-sensed (Landsat) estimates of vegetation cover collected every 2–5 years from southwestern Wyoming, USA, over nearly three decades (1985–2015), we modeled changes in sagebrush cover on 375 former oil and gas well pads in response to weather and site-level conditions. We then used modeled relationships to predict recovery time across the landscape as an indicator of resilience for vegetation after well pad disturbances, where faster recovery indicates a greater capacity to recover when similarly disturbed. We found the rate of change in sagebrush cover generally increased with moisture and temperature, particularly at higher elevations. Rate of change in sagebrush cover also increased and decreased with greater percent sand and larger well pads, respectively. We predicted 21% of the landscape would recover to pre-disturbance conditions within 60 years, whereas other areas may require >100 years for recovery. These predictions and maps could inform future restoration efforts as they reflect resilience. This approach also is applicable to other disturbance types (e.g., fires and vegetation removal treatments) across landscapes, which can further improve conservation efforts by characterizing past conditions and monitoring trends in subsequent years.

Wyoming↗
USGS2020

Western bumble bee: Declines in United States and range-wide information gaps

In recent decades, many bumble bee species have declined due to changes in habitat, climate, and pressures from pathogens, pesticides, and introduced species. The western bumble bee ( Bombus occidentalis ), once common throughout western North America, is a species of concern and will be considered for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). We attempt to improve alignment of data collection and research with USFWS needs to consider redundancy, resiliency, and representation in the upcoming species status assessment. We reviewed existing data and literature on B. occidentalis , highlighting information gaps and priority topics for research. Priorities include increased knowledge of trends, basic information on several life‐history stages, and improved understanding of the relative and interacting effects of stressors on population trends, especially the effects of pathogens, pesticides, climate change, and habitat loss. An understanding of how and where geographic range extent has changed for the two subspecies of B. occidentalis is also needed. We outline data that could be easily collected in other research projects that would increase their utility for understanding range‐wide trends of bumble bees. We modeled the overall trend in occupancy from 1998 to 2018 of Bombus occidentalis within the continental United States using existing data. The probability of local occupancy declined by 93% over 21 yr from 0.81 (95% CRI = 0.43, 0.98) in 1998 to 0.06 (95% CRI = 0.02, 0.16) in 2018. The decline in occupancy varied spatially by landcover and other environmental factors. Detection rates vary in both space and time, but peak detection across the continental United States occurs in mid‐July. We found considerable spatial gaps in recent sampling, with limited sampling in many regions, including most of Alaska, northwestern Canada, and the southwestern United States. We therefore propose a sampling design to address these gaps to best inform the ESA species status assessment through improved assessment of how the spatial distribution of stressors influences occupancy changes. Finally, we request involvement via data sharing, participation in occupancy sampling with repeated visits to distributed survey sites, and complementary research to address priorities outlined in this paper.

Ecosphere↗
USGS1999

Development of a 14-digit Hydrologic Unit Code Numbering System for South Carolina

A Hydrologic Unit Map showing the cataloging units, watersheds, and subwatersheds of South Carolina has been developed by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, funded through a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 319 Grant, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. These delineations represent 8-, 11-, and 14-digit Hydrologic Unit Codes, respectively. This map presents information on drainage, hydrography, and hydrologic boundaries of the water-resources regions, subregions, accounting units, cataloging units, watersheds, and subwatersheds. The source maps for the basin delineations are 1:24,000-scale 7.5-minute series topographic maps and the base maps are from 1:100,000-scale Digital Line Graphs; however, the data are published at a scale of 1:500,000. In addition, an electronic version of the data is provided on a compact disc. Of the 1,022 subwatersheds delineated for this project, 1,004 range in size from 3,000 to 40,000 acres (4.69 to 62.5 square miles). Seventeen subwatersheds are smaller than 3,000 acres and one subwatershed, located on St. Helena Island, is larger than 40,000 acres. This map and its associated codes provide a standardized base for use by water-resource managers and planners in locating, storing, retrieving, and exchanging hydrologic data. In addition, the map can be used for cataloging water-data acquisition activities, geographically organizing hydrologic data, and planning and describing water-use and related land-use activities.

South Carolina↗
USGS2013

Great Lakes rivermouths: a primer for managers

Between the North American Great Lakes and their tributaries are the places where the confluence of river and lake waters creates a distinct ecosystem: the rivermouth ecosystem. Human development has often centered around these rivermouths, in part, because they provide a rich array of ecosystem services. Not surprisingly, centuries of intense human activity have led to substantial pressures on, and alterations to, these ecosystems, often diminishing or degrading their ecological functions and associated ecological services. Many Great Lakes rivermouths are the focus of intense restoration efforts. For example, 36 of the active Great Lakes Areas of Concern (AOCs) are rivermouths or areas that include one or more rivermouths. Historically, research of rivermouth ecosystems has been piecemeal, focused on the Great Lakes proper or on the upper reaches of tributaries, with little direct study of the rivermouth itself. Researchers have been divided among disciplines, agencies and institutions; and they often work independently and use disparate venues to communicate their work. Management has also been fragmented with a focus on smaller, localized, sub-habitat units and socio-political or economic elements, rather than system-level consideration. This Primer presents the case for a more holistic approach to rivermouth science and management that can enable restoration of ecosystem services with multiple benefits to humans and the Great Lakes ecosystem. A conceptual model is presented with supporting text that describes the structures and processes common to all rivermouths, substantiating the case for treating these ecosystems as an identifiable class. 1 Ecological services provided by rivermouths and changes in how humans value those services over time are illustrated through case studies of two Great Lakes rivermouths—the St. Louis River and the Maumee River. Specific ecosystem services are identified in italics throughout this Primer and follow definitions described by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (Table1). Collectively, this primer synthesizes existing information in a new way that aims to support management of rivermouths as distinct and important ecosystems. The development and management decisions made around rivermouths today will shape the future of these ecosystems, and the human communities within them, well into the future. 1 The information presented in this paper was derived from discussions and draft documents of the Great Lakes Rivermouth Collaboratory. The Great Lakes Rivermouth Collaboratory was established by the U.S. Geological Survey's Great Lakes Science Center (USGS-GLSC) in collaboration with the Great Lakes Commission to engage the Great Lakes scientific community in sharing and documenting knowledge about freshwater rivermouth ecosystems. For more information, see http://www.glc.org/habitat/Rivermouth-Collaboratory.html.

Great Lakes↗
USGS2014

Birds of a feather

Greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasiunus , hereafter sage-grouse) are broadly distributed, occupy a diversity of sagebrush habitats, and face multiple threats. As a result of these threats, sage-grouse populations are declining and are now absent from almost one-half of their estimated range prior to Euro-American settlement. The risks to sage-grouse are significant enough to merit candidate status for this species for listing under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (Federal Register Notice, March 5, 2010). According to this decision by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 2010, population and habitat fragmentation coupled with lack of regulatory mechanisms warranted listing, although implementation of actions has been precluded by other priorities. Candidate status for listing under the Endangered Species Act and possible regulatory action in the near future provide strong motivation to better understand the dynamics of sage-grouse populations and their habitat requirements. The general approach currently taken by managers focuses on maintaining or enhancing sage-grouse populations across their distribution in regions containing the highest densities of breeding birds and their important seasonal habitats, also known as priority areas for conservation (PACs). The rationale behind this approach is that it permits limited resources to be applied in regions that have the greatest potential to benefit the largest proportion of sage-grouse. Development and other forms of land use can then proceed under standard regulations in areas outside PACs. Implementation of this approach requires detailed information about habitat, connections among sage-grouse populations, and approaches to restore and maintain sagebrush. These are important topics of study by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and its research partners.

California;Idaho;Nevada;Oregon;Utah;Washington↗
USGS2005

Inventory of the mosses, liverworts, and lichens of Olympic National Park, Washington- Species list

The identification of non-vascular cryptogam species (lichens, mosses, liverworts, and hornworts) is especially challenging because of their small size, their often microscopic or chemical distinguishing features, and their enormous diversity. Consequently, they are a poorly known component of Olympic National Park, despite their ecological and aesthetic importance. This project is the first attempt at a systematic, comprehensive survey of non-vascular cryptogams in the Park and presents the current species list with descriptions of the substrate and vascular vegetation type where they were observed. The authors strove to collect from as many park environments as feasible, and distributed collections along important environmental gradients in different regions of the park using vascular vegetation as an environmental indicator. They also collected opportunistically when interesting habitats or microhabitats were encountered. Finally, the authors updated the nomenclature in the Park’s previous collection of nonvascular plants. This study identified approximately 13,200 bryophyte and lichen species, adding approximately 425 new species to the Olympic National Park Herbarium. These data, combined with select literature reports and personal data from Martin and Karen Hutten, added more than 350 species to the previously documented Olympic Peninsula lichen and bryophyte list. The authors discuss the list in a local, regional, and global context of rarity, as well as cryptogam conservation and further work needed in Olympic National Park. The improved inventory of Olympic National Park cryptogams represented by this project enables Olympic National Park to protect populations of rare and sensitive species, assess the damage caused by illegal harvest, and contribute information to the Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service Sensitive Species Programs.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2024

Water-quality constituent concentrations and loads computed using real-time water-quality data for the Republican River, Clay Center, Kansas, August 2018 through July 2023

Milford Lake, the largest reservoir by surface area in Kansas, has had confirmed harmful algal blooms every summer since reporting began in 2011, except 2018–19. Milford Lake has been listed as impaired and designated hypereutrophic under section 303(d) of the 1972 Clean Water Act. In 2014, the Kansas Department of Health and Environment established a total maximum daily load for eutrophication and dissolved oxygen impairments. In 2018, the Natural Resources Conservation Service funded the Regional Conservation Partnership Program for the Milford Lake Watershed to focus on best management practices in the Lower Republican River Basin. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Kansas Water Office, completed this study to assess and quantify water-quality constituent concentrations and loads for total nitrogen (TN), total phosphorus (TP), and suspended sediment (SS) using previously published models for the Republican River near Clay Center, Kansas (U.S. Geological Survey station 06856600), about 15 miles upstream from Milford Lake, during August 1, 2018, through July 31, 2023. TN, TP, and SS concentrations and loads were monitored because of their relation to water supply and water-quality issues in Milford Lake, including nutrient and sediment transport, taste-and-odor events, potentially toxic cyano-harmful algal bloom events, and subsequent downstream transport of contaminants. Data from this report can be used to evaluate changing conditions, provide science-based information for decision making, and help meet regulatory requirements. The study mean annual loads for TN and TP were greater than the reported mean annual total maximum daily load and exceeded the watershed reduction goals as well as Kansas nonpoint source reduction goals defined by the Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy for the Lower Republican watershed. TN and TP annual loads during 2019–20 were greater than the defined mean annual total maximum daily load. During 2022, TN and TP annual loads were less than the Kansas nonpoint source reduction goal and during 2023 were less than the watershed reduction goal. SS loads were less than the mean annual sedimentation rate computed from the total maximum daily load for the entirety of the study period, and the study mean annual load was 72 percent less than the designed annual reservoir sedimentation rate for Milford Lake. Data collected during the study period represented a wide range of streamflow and water-quality conditions at the Clay Center site, ranging from low-flow with less frequent runoff during 2023 to high-flow with frequent runoff during 2018. Nutrient reduction goals were only met in the final 2 years of the study period when annual mean flow conditions were lower than normal, indicating that goals may be unattainable during average or high-flow conditions. In all years except 2019, the annual mean SS load was less than the 20-year sediment load reduction target. Although annual SS loads at the Clay Center site generally decreased over time, corresponding reductions in annual streamflow indicated that these reductions may primarily be related to less frequent runoff from the upstream basin. Continued water-quality monitoring and tracking of best management practices are necessary to understand the success of Regional Conservation Partnership Program efforts to reduce nutrient transport in the Milford Lake Watershed.

Kansas↗
USGS2022

Standard operating protocol for mark and recapture monitoring of Brook Floater in streams

The Brook Floater ( Alasmidonta varicosa ) is a small (<100 mm) freshwater mussel (Family: Unionidae) found in streams of the eastern United States (U.S.) (Nedeau 2008). While there has been limited effort to document the status of Brook Floater across its range, there is evidence of Brook Floater range contraction and declining local abundances over recent decades (Wicklow et al. 2017, NatureServe 2021). Brook Floater is a Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) in 15 states (94% of range); listed as endangered, threatened, or special concern in nearly every state and province where it still occurs; and has been extirpated from two states (Rhode Island and Delaware). Brook Floater was petitioned for Federal listing under the U.S. Endangered Species Act; however, the listing was determined not to be warranted (U.S. FWS 2019), although it remains a Regional SGCN of very high concern in U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (U.S. FWS) Regions 5 (Terwilliger 2015) and 4 (SEAFWA-WDC 2019) and is an At-Risk Species in U.S. FWS Region 5. A critical component of understanding population declines is site-specific information about population density and demographics (e.g., growth, age structure) to assess population viability. This information had previously only been collected for a few populations of Brook Floater (e.g., Massachusetts Division of Fisheries & Wildlife, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission) and methods to collect these data varied from state to state, thus limiting comparisons across the range. In 2016, a competitive State Wildlife Grant (SWG) was awarded to develop a standardized monitoring technique that will aid in understanding differences in population viability across its range and assess changes in populations through time. The protocol described in this report was subsequently developed and tested by Massachusetts and Maine (2 sites in each state) and revised based on field experiences. Data collected using this protocol will allow for state managers to make informed decisions about management actions for Brook Floater. Monitoring approaches are ideally designed to meet management objectives. Management objectives are specific, quantifiable outcomes that reflect the values of the decision makers and relate directly to the management decisions (Conroy and Peterson 2013). Lack of well-defined objectives hinders success of conservation and management actions because there are undefined metrics to determine when the objectives have been met (Yoccoz et al. 2001, Nichols and Thompson 2006). While monitoring to understand a system (i.e., status and trends; Reynolds et al. 2016) provides baseline information for developing management recommendations in the future, Nichols and Thompson (2006) criticize status and trends monitoring because of time lags associated with conservation and the costs and resource availability needed for surveillance, among other reasons. State partners in the Brook Floater SWG have a variety of different monitoring objectives (e.g., abundance/density, survival, recruitment) that depend on the population sizes and demographics. There are many approaches for estimating population parameters such as density, age structure, recruitment, and growth rates. For example, presence/absence (i.e., multistate models), counts (i.e., multi-state models or Dail-Madsen model; Dail and Madsen 2011), and capture mark-recapture (CMR; e.g. Cormack-Jolly-Seber models; Lindberg and Rexstad 2002) are all approaches for assessing population status and viability.

Cooperator Science Series↗
USGS2026

Abundance and movement patterns of fish accessing a reconnected Lake Erie coastal wetland: Insights from high-resolution sonar data

Coastal wetlands of the Laurentian Great Lakes are complex ecosystems that provide essential biological services, including providing habitat for a suite of fish species. As restoration efforts for these coastal wetlands increase, there is a need to characterize how well restored areas support the life histories of wetland, riverine, and lake fishes. Most traditional survey methods (e.g. 24hr trap netting, visual surveys) are implemented over periods of time that make it difficult to describe short-term fluxes in fish activity, especially in waters with difficult access or high turbidity. To address this gap, we used acoustic sonar technology to evaluate fish movement in a recently reconnected coastal wetland on the southern shore of western Lake Erie. Data collected over four years (2011-2014) indicated that the 10 ha wetland was continuously utilized by millions of fish, with discernible fluctuations in usage patterns observed on both daily and annual scales. These insights add to our understanding of how fish assemblages respond to restored coastal wetland habitats and can inform management decisions that may impact fish access (e.g. conduct management activities that may be disruptive to fish populations during periods of reduced utilization). Additional study of short-term fish movements using high-resolution sonar and other technologies will reveal patterns that may enhance the effectiveness of restoration and management efforts in Great Lakes coastal wetlands.

Lake Erie↗
USGS2013

Priority data on marine and estuarine resources within northeastern National Parks: Inventory and acquisition needs

The purpose of this project was to guide development of a strategy for the inventory and mapping of submerged natural resources associated within 10 coastal parks of the National Park Service (NPS) Northeast Region (NER; see Table 1). Priority data needs were identified by the NER Ocean Stewardship Task Force. The majority of the NER priority data needs involve the biotic, chemical, and geological characterization of the seabed. Taken collectively, this demands a consistent and unified approach to habitat classification. The Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard (CMECS) is endorsed by the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC-STD-018) for classifying ecological units in coastal and marine environments, and is recommended as a framework for acquiring and organizing NER data. We prepared an inventory of existing data on priority marine and estuarine natural resources within the ten NER coastal parks. This report describes the data and information sources relevant to each park and identifies gaps in available data. Overwhelmingly and uniformly across all parks, the most pressing needs are consistent, high-resolution bathymetry and seafloor characterization data. Approaches for acquiring these data using an integrated, multi-resolution sampling framework are recommended.

Natural Resource Report↗
USGS2016

Moving from awareness to action: Advancing climate change vulnerability assessments and adaptation planning for Idaho and Montana National Forests

The rugged landscapes of northern Idaho and western Montana support biodiverse ecosystems, and provide a variety of natural resources and services for human communities. However, the benefits provided by these ecosystems may be at risk as changing climate magnifies existing stressors and allows new stressors to emerge. Preparation for and response to these potential changes can be most effectively addressed through multi-stakeholder partnerships, evaluating vulnerability of important resources to climate change, and developing response and preparation strategies for managing key natural resources in a changing world. This project will support climate-smart conservation and management across forests of northern Idaho and western Montana through three main components: (1) fostering partnerships among scientists, land managers, regional landowners, conservation practitioners, and the public; (2) assessing the vulnerability of a suite of regionally important resources to climate change and other stressors; and (3) creating a portfolio of adaptation strategies and actions to help resource managers prepare for and respond to the likely impacts of climate change. The results of this project will be used to inform the upcoming land management plan revisions for national forests, helping ensure that the most effective and robust conservation and management strategies are implemented to preserve our natural resources.

Idaho, Montana↗
USGS2025

A summary of grizzly bear distribution in the lower-48 US states in 2024

Understanding the distribution of grizzly bear populations in the lower-48 states, is important for their conservation and management, and for public safety. Previously, our research teams working in grizzly bear ecosystems in the lower-48 states used varying methods to estimate distribution of grizzly bear populations. In the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) and Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE), zonal analysis and ordinary kriging were applied to an array of grid cells with or without verified presence of grizzly bears, however the parameters of the methods varied between the two ecosystems. In the Cabinet-Yaak Ecosystem (CYE) and the Selkirk Ecosystem (SE), population distribution was mapped as the Recovery Zone plus “bears outside of Recovery Zone” areas (Allen 2011). Additionally, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service developed a method for estimating areas where grizzly bears “may be present” to help agencies or prospective applicants evaluate whether or not proposed actions may affect grizzly bears (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2020). Since the mid 2010s, cooperating agencies have collaborated in documenting and maintaining a database of verified outlier observations that occur between or well outside of grizzly bear Recovery Zones and these data inform the “may be present” mapping.

lower 48 states↗
USGS2018

Defining blue carbon: The emergence of a climate context for coastal carbon dynamics

Blue Carbon Ecosystems (BCEs) are defined as coastal wetland ecosystems with manageable and atmospherically significant carbon stocks and fluxes. Policy and management opportunities have promoted the emergence of blue carbon as a concept and spurred scientific interest to reduce uncertainties in coastal carbon budgets. The four major BCEs are generally classified by their plant communities: tidal marshes, tidal freshwater forests, mangroves, and seagrass meadows.

Book chapter↗
USGS2022

Multi-species, multi-country analysis reveals North Americans are willing to pay for transborder migratory species conservation

Migratory species often provide ecosystem service benefits to people in one country while receiving habitat support in other countries. The multinational cooperation that could help ensure continued provisioning of these benefits by migration may be informed by understanding the economic values people in different countries place on the benefits they derive from migratory wildlife. We conducted contingent valuation surveys to estimate the willingness of 3733 respondents from Canada, the United States and México to invest in conservation for two disparate migratory species, the northern pintail duck Anas acuta and the Mexican free-tailed bat Tadarida brasiliensis mexicana . With zero-inflated mixed-effects negative binomial regression (explaining 87% of the variation in willingness to pay for conservation), we found that respondents from each nation, after controlling for both household income and per capita national Gross Domestic Product, were willing to invest in conservation in other countries. This willingness to pay for conservation, even when respondents knew that funds would be used to support benefits accruing primarily in other countries, demonstrates the potential for support of multinational conservation policies and programmes that direct resources to locations where the most critical habitat is located, rather than where the funding is generated. These findings could be used to support the development or expansion of new and existing international conservation programmes for migratory species.

People and Nature↗