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 109 records · Page 6Linked 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↗
USGS2003

Science support for managing migratory waterfowl.

Migratory birds in North America are an international resource shared by Canada, the United States, and Mexico. Ultimate population management authority in the U.S. lies with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), but states participate in development of management decisions through the Flyway system. The FWS, state wildlife agencies, and nongovernmental organizations participate through independent actions and cooperative Joint Ventures under the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) to acquire, protect, restore, and enhance wetlands and other habitats critical to the long-term conservation of breeding, migrating, and wintering waterfowl. A thorough base of scientific information is required to support and evaluate waterfowl populations and habitat management in North America.

WERC Fact Sheet↗
USGS2015

A hidden view of wildlife conservation: How camera traps aid science, research and management

Florida panthers are among the world’s most endangered — and elusive — animals. For approximately four decades, scientists have been researching this small population of panthers that inhabit the dense forests and swamps of south Florida. Because of their wide habitat range along with an absence of clear visual features, these animals are difficult to detect and identify. In 2013, however, researchers released a study that used camera trap images collected between 2005 and 2007 to generate the first statistically reliable density estimates for the remaining population of this subspecies. Camera traps — remotely activated cameras with infrared sensors — first gained measurable popularity in wildlife conservation in the early 1990s. Today, they’re used for a variety of activities, from species-specific research to broad-scale inventory or monitoring programs that, in some cases, attempt to detect biodiversity across vast landscapes. As this modern tool continues to evolve, it’s worth examining its uses and benefits for wildlife management and conservation.

The Wildlife Professional↗
USGS2018

Applying recreation ecology science to sustainably manage camping impacts: A classification of camping management strategies

Wilderness and other protected natural areas such as national forests, parks, and refuges are managed to provide high-quality recreational opportunities while preserving natural resource conditions. In managing recreation visitation, land managers could allow visitors to create their own infrastructure of trails and campsites, or they could choose to apply an impact management strategy to provide an infrastructure that includes sustainably designed trails and campsites. Recreation ecology studies have repeatedly demonstrated that informal “visitor-created” trails and campsites are generally not sustainably designed or located (Cole 1981, 1982a, 2013; Marion 2016; Wimpey and Marion 2011). For example, informal trails frequently occur in flat terrain where trail widening and muddiness can be chronic problems, or are fall-aligned (perpendicular to contour lines) in sloping terrain, where they are considerably more vulnerable to soil loss and widening (Marion et al. 2016; Marion and Wimpey 2017). Similarly, visitors are highly attracted to flat terrain near water for camping, where they frequently create substantial numbers of large and unnecessary campsites at densities that threaten visitor solitude, experiential qualities, and natural resources.

International Journal of Wilderness↗
USGS2017

Using science to inform management and improve biological conservation in the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan

The Mojave and Colorado deserts of southern California have been viewed as vast wilderness since early exploration and, until recently, were considered the most untrammeled among western landscapes in the contiguous lower 48 states (United States Department of Agriculture 1893; Leu et al. 2008). However, the factors that define desert wilderness—small human population, temperature differentials that create unrelenting winds, low rainfall, and cloudless skies—are attractive for renewable energy development. The demand for clean, renewable energy is a national and regional priority and has increased demand for large-scale solar and wind farms in the deserts, particularly in California. The need to balance these national and state energy priorities with existing natural resource and land conservation policies has emerged as a landscape-scale land-use planning initiative known as the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan (DRECP). One of the primary goals for the DRECP was to establish Development Focus Areas (DFAs) where high-quality renewable energy potential of up to 20 gigawatts (GW) could be implemented by the year 2040. DFAs were designed to provide expedited project approvals in locations where environmental impacts could be managed and mitigated, and proximity to transmission corridors provides for the efficient dissemination of energy to users. The DRECP also aims to identify protections for natural resources, recreation, and cultural resources. This plan identifies 37 covered species that receive special consideration in the DRECP. Among the special considerations are climate adaptation requirements, such as the ability to maintain population connectivity through wildlife corridors, while protecting several special recreation areas and 32,000 known cultural sites that are dispersed throughout the region. We evaluated several particular aspects of the DRECP design and process. In particular, we examined land designations in relation to published studies on Mohave ground squirrel (Xerospermophilus mohavensis) habitat and genetic diversity patterns of a suite of broadly distributed desert animal species. The squirrel and its habitat are of particular interest because the entire range of the squirrel is encompassed by the DRECP. We describe the framework of the DRECP, provide a case study of how the DRECP accommodates the needs of the Mohave ground squirrel and its habitat, illustrate DFAs in relation to the genetic diversity of a broad range of terrestrial biota, and conclude with some observations on how land-use issues were resolved across the landscape under various scenarios.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2018

Increased scientific rigor will improve reliability of research and effectiveness of management

Rigorous science that produces reliable knowledge is critical to wildlife management because it increases accurate understanding of the natural world and informs management decisions effectively. Application of a rigorous scientific method based on hypothesis testing minimizes unreliable knowledge produced by research. To evaluate the prevalence of scientific rigor in wildlife research, we examined 24 issues of the Journal of Wildlife Management from August 2013 through July 2016. We found 43.9% of studies did not state or imply a priori hypotheses, which are necessary to produce reliable knowledge. We posit that this is due, at least in part, to a lack of common understanding of what rigorous science entails, how it produces more reliable knowledge than other forms of interpreting observations, and how research should be designed to maximize inferential strength and usefulness of application. Current primary literature does not provide succinct explanations of the logic behind a rigorous scientific method or readily applicable guidance for employing it, particularly in wildlife biology; we therefore synthesized an overview of the history, philosophy, and logic that define scientific rigor for biological studies. A rigorous scientific method includes 1) generating a research question from theory and prior observations, 2) developing hypotheses (i.e., plausible biological answers to the question), 3) formulating predictions (i.e., facts that must be true if the hypothesis is true), 4) designing and implementing research to collect data potentially consistent with predictions, 5) evaluating whether predictions are consistent with collected data, and 6) drawing inferences based on the evaluation. Explicitly testing a priori hypotheses reduces overall uncertainty by reducing the number of plausible biological explanations to only those that are logically well supported. Such research also draws inferences that are robust to idiosyncratic observations and unavoidable human biases. Offering only post hoc interpretations of statistical patterns (i.e., a posteriori hypotheses) adds to uncertainty because it increases the number of plausible biological explanations without determining which have the greatest support. Further, post hoc interpretations are strongly subject to human biases. Testing hypotheses maximizes the credibility of research findings, makes the strongest contributions to theory and management, and improves reproducibility of research. Management decisions based on rigorous research are most likely to result in effective conservation of wildlife resources.

Journal of Wildlife Management↗
USGS2015

Investing in citizen science can improve natural resource management and environmental protection

Citizen science has made substantive contributions to science for hundreds of years. More recently, it has contributed to many articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals and has influenced natural resource management and environmental protection decisions and policies across the nation. Over the last 10 years, citizen science—participation by the public in a scientific project—has seen explosive growth in the United States, particularly in ecology, the environmental sciences, and related fields of inquiry. In this report, we explore the current use of citizen science in natural resource and environmental science and decision making in the United States and describe the investments organizations might make to benefit from citizen science.

Issues in Ecology↗
USGS2016

Prospects and limitations of citizen science in invasive species management: A case study with Burmese pythons in Everglades National Park

Citizen-science programs have the potential to contribute to the management of invasive species, including Python molurus bivittatus (Burmese Python) in Florida. We characterized citizen-science–generated Burmese Python information from Everglades National Park (ENP) to explore how citizen science may be useful in this effort. As an initial step, we compiled and summarized records of Burmese Python observations and removals collected by both professional and citizen scientists in ENP during 2000–2014 and found many patterns of possible significance, including changes in annual observations and in demographic composition after a cold event. These patterns are difficult to confidently interpret because the records lack search-effort information, however, and differences among years may result from differences in search effort. We began collecting search-effort information in 2014 by leveraging an ongoing citizen-science program in ENP. Program participation was generally low, with most authorized participants in 2014 not searching for the snakes at all. We discuss the possible explanations for low participation, especially how the low likelihood of observing pythons weakens incentives to search. The monthly rate of Burmese Python observations for 2014 averaged ~1 observation for every 8 h of searching, but during several months, the rate was 1 python per >40 h of searching. These low observation-rates are a natural outcome of the snakes’ low detectability—few Burmese Pythons are likely to be observed even if many are present. The general inaccessibility of the southern Florida landscape also severely limits the effectiveness of using visual searches to find and remove pythons for the purposes of population control. Instead, and despite the difficulties in incentivizing voluntary participation, the value of citizen-science efforts in the management of the Burmese Python population is in collecting search-effort information.

Southeastern Naturalist↗
USGS2024

Identifying priority science information needs for managing public lands

Public lands worldwide provide diverse resources, uses, and values, ranging from wilderness to extractive uses. Decision-making on public lands is complex as a result and is required by law to be informed by science. However, public land managers may not always have the science they need. We developed a methodology for identifying priority science needs for public land management agencies. We relied on two core data sources: environmental effects analyses conducted for agency decisions and legal challenges to those decisions. We considered needs in four categories: data, science, methods, and mitigation measures. We classified topics as primary science needs when (1) the topic was analyzed frequently in agency environmental analyses, (2) our metric of quality/defensibility was low or mitigation measures were frequently included for the topic, and (3) the agency was challenged on its use of science for the topic. We applied our methodology to the Bureau of Land Management—the largest public land manager in the United States—in Colorado, a state with abundant and diverse public lands. Primary identified needs were data on vegetation; science about effects of oil and gas development and livestock grazing on multiple resources, including terrestrial wildlife; methods for analyzing environmental effects for many topics; and mitigation measures for protecting vegetation, soils, water quality, and archaeological and historic resources. Science needs often reflect needs for facilitating and supporting the use of existing science in agency decision-making. Our method can be applied across agencies, geographies, and timeframes to help strengthen science use in public lands decision-making.

Environmental Management↗
USGS2024

Amphibian and reptile conservation in the United States of America

Wildlife stewardship is of utmost importance in the United States, where management for sustainable natural resources is extended to native species including amphibians and reptiles. The U.S. wildlife conservation framework is a nested system of authorities regulating species and habitats, science-based management and policy decisions, and adaptive management as new knowledge is applied to improve outcomes of population- and habitat-management actions. Yet the approach has evolved through time, from single-species management of game species to the conservation of entire ecosystems and the biodiversity they support. Today, the mismatch of conservation ideals with conservation capacity puts nongame species like amphibians and reptiles in the crosshairs for losses due to insufficient resources to address growing numbers of threats. Despite these challenges, optimism prevails, as the management and conservation of U.S. herpetofauna is an increasing priority of the public, with considerable investment into habitat restoration, species-specific threat mitigation, research, public outreach, and education. Herein, we outline key elements of U.S. herpetological conservation efficacy: (1) a web of legal authorities governing the management of U.S. herpetofauna and their habitats; (2) a network of people and organizations that work toward filling priority knowledge gaps by conducting scientific research and that are actively engaged in the science-management interface for species-to-ecosystem level conservation decision-making, and (3) a learning framework of adaptive management within the legal landscape (“lawscape”) and for improving effectiveness of conservation actions. Lastly, the human dimension of species conservation in the U.S. is emerging, where bottom-up local efforts are having success in addition to state- and regional-scale approaches. We propose U.S. herpetological conservation priorities under three themes: threats, research, and human dimensions (people). Together these multifaceted efforts are contributing to advances in the maintenance of U.S. amphibian and reptile diversity. The success of these efforts is notable and could be viewed as a model system, where lessons learned may apply elsewhere.

Book chapter↗
USGS2014

Geospatial considerations for a multiorganizational, landscape-scale program

Geospatial data play an increasingly important role in natural resources management, conservation, and science-based projects. The management and effective use of spatial data becomes significantly more complex when the efforts involve a myriad of landscape-scale projects combined with a multiorganizational collaboration. There is sparse literature to guide users on this daunting subject; therefore, we present a framework of considerations for working with geospatial data that will provide direction to data stewards, scientists, collaborators, and managers for developing geospatial management plans. The concepts we present apply to a variety of geospatial programs or projects, which we describe as a “scalable framework” of processes for integrating geospatial efforts with management, science, and conservation initiatives. Our framework includes five tenets of geospatial data management: (1) the importance of investing in data management and standardization, (2) the scalability of content/efforts addressed in geospatial management plans, (3) the lifecycle of a geospatial effort, (4) a framework for the integration of geographic information systems (GIS) in a landscape-scale conservation or management program, and (5) the major geospatial considerations prior to data acquisition. We conclude with a discussion of future considerations and challenges.

Journal of Map & Geography Libraries↗
USGS2023

Towards vibrant fish populations and sustainable fisheries that benefit all: Learning from the last 30 years to inform the next 30 years

A common goal among fisheries science professionals, stakeholders, and rights holders is to ensure the persistence and resilience of vibrant fish populations and sustainable, equitable fisheries in diverse aquatic ecosystems, from small headwater streams to offshore pelagic waters. Achieving this goal requires a complex intersection of science and management, and a recognition of the interconnections among people, place, and fish that govern these tightly coupled socioecological and sociotechnical systems. The World Fisheries Congress (WFC) convenes every four years and provides a unique global forum to debate and discuss threats, issues, and opportunities facing fish populations and fisheries. The 2021 WFC meeting, hosted remotely in Adelaide, Australia, marked the 30th year since the first meeting was held in Athens, Greece, and provided an opportunity to reflect on progress made in the past 30 years and provide guidance for the future. We assembled a diverse team of individuals involved with the Adelaide WFC and reflected on the major challenges that faced fish and fisheries over the past 30 years, discussed progress toward overcoming those challenges, and then used themes that emerged during the Congress to identify issues and opportunities to improve sustainability in the world's fisheries for the next 30 years. Key future needs and opportunities identified include: rethinking fisheries management systems and modelling approaches, modernizing and integrating assessment and information systems, being responsive and flexible in addressing persistent and emerging threats to fish and fisheries, mainstreaming the human dimension of fisheries, rethinking governance, policy and compliance, and achieving equity and inclusion in fisheries. We also identified a number of cross-cutting themes including better understanding the role of fish as nutrition in a hungry world, adapting to climate change, embracing transdisciplinarity, respecting Indigenous knowledge systems, thinking ahead with foresight science, and working together across scales. By reflecting on the past and thinking about the future, we aim to provide guidance for achieving our mutual goal of sustaining vibrant fish populations and sustainable fisheries that benefit all. We hope that this prospective thinking can serve as a guide to (i) assess progress towards achieving this lofty goal and (ii) refine our path with input from new and emerging voices and approaches in fisheries science, management, and stewardship.

Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries↗
USGS2018

Artelle et al. (2018) miss the science underlying North American wildlife management

Artelle et al . (2018) conclude that “hallmarks of science” are largely missing from North American wildlife management based on a desk review of selected hunting management plans and related documents found through Internet searches and email requests to state and provincial wildlife agencies. We highlight three fundamental problems that compromise the validity of the conclusions posited: missing information to support selection of “hallmarks of science,” confusion about the roles and nature of science and management, and failure to engage effectively with the scientists and managers actively managing wildlife populations in North America.

Science Advances↗
USGS2026

Debunking the myth of the quintessential resource manager: Precision in actionable science

“Actionable science” is a widely held standard for identifying the merits of natural resources research. Yet, science is often framed as actionable to a vaguely identified quintessential “manager” without defining either the intended manager or use. Generic descriptions lack precision for identifying end users or their needs, limiting methodological rigor in research design and leading to contextual misalignments of outputs with the need they intended to serve. Further, imprecise terminology limits the ability to evaluate impact, replicate efforts, or foster adoption and implementation of findings. This perspective article presents the heuristic of “who, what, when, where, why, how” to help researchers be more precise when describing their actionable science. Through intentional reflection, researchers can move beyond generic framings of “managers” representing monolithic organizations. “Managers” become individuals, with unique responsibilities, functions, worldviews, and levels of authority, all influencing their use of and need for scientific information and data.

Conservation Science and Practice↗
USGS1999

U.S. Geological Survey Program on the South Florida Ecosystem; proceedings of South Florida Restoration Science Forum, May 17-19, 1999, Boca Raton, Florida

The purpose of the forum is to highlight the powerful connection between science and management decisions in restoration efforts. The public's investment in science is paying off in support of better management decisions and restoration of imperiled south Florida Ecosystems, including the internationally recognized, globally significant Everglades. The forum affords a unique opportunity for elected officials and other policy- and decision makers, along with the general public, to see--under one roof--highlights of the most significant restoration science and management efforts underway. The forum promotes the link between science and management. Scientists and decisionmakers will come together to discuss the needs of each in order to ensure that plans for restoration are based in science and are the most cost effective and highest quality possible. Continued vigilance over south Florida ecosystems is essential to prevent further harm and to restore them. Representatives from numerous federal, state, local, and nongovernmental entities are organizing the forum for the Science Coordination Team of the South Florida Ecosystem Working Group. The U.S. Geological Survey and the South Florida Water Management District are the primary hosts of the forum.

Florida↗