Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “PEER Report”

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
USGS2010

Water-quality sampling by the U.S. Geological Survey-Standard protocols and procedures

Thumbnail of and link to report PDF (1.0 MB) The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) develops the sampling procedures and collects the data necessary for the accurate assessment and wise management of our Nation's surface-water and groundwater resources. Federal and State agencies, water-resource regulators and managers, and many organizations and interested parties in the public and private sectors depend on the reliability, timeliness, and integrity of the data we collect and the scientific soundness and impartiality of our data assessments and analysis. The standard data-collection methods uniformly used by USGS water-quality personnel are peer reviewed, kept up-to-date, and published in the National Field Manual for the Collection of Water-Quality Data (http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A/).

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2010

Implementation of the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA) ground-motion prediction equations in Fortran and R

This report presents two methods for implementing the earthquake ground-motion prediction equations released in 2008 as part of the Next Generation Attenuation of Ground Motions (NGA-West, or NGA) project coordinated by the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER). These models were developed for predicting ground-motion parameters for shallow crustal earthquakes in active tectonic regions (such as California). Of the five ground-motion prediction equations (GMPEs) developed during the NGA project, four models are implemented: the GMPEs of Abrahamson and Silva (2008), Boore and Atkinson (2008), Campbell and Bozorgnia (2008), and Chiou and Youngs (2008a); these models are abbreviated as AS08, BA08, CB08, and CY08, respectively. Since site response is widely recognized as an important influence of ground motions, engineering applications typically require that such effects be modeled. The model of Idriss (2008) is not implemented in our programs because it does not explicitly include site response, whereas the other four models include site response and use the same variable to describe the site condition (VS30). We do not intend to discourage the use of the Idriss (2008) model, but we have chosen to implement the other four NGA models in our programs for those users who require ground-motion estimates for various site conditions. We have implemented the NGA models by using two separate programming languages: Fortran and R (R Development Core Team, 2010). Fortran, a compiled programming language, has been used in the scientific community for decades. R is an object-oriented language and environment for statistical computing that is gaining popularity in the statistical and scientific community. Derived from the S language and environment developed at Bell Laboratories, R is an open-source language that is freely available at http://www.r-project.org/ (last accessed 11 January 2011). In R, the functions for computing the NGA equations can be loaded as an add-on user-contributed code, which is referred to as a ?package? in R. The details of the nga package (Kaklamanos and Thompson, 2010) are presented in this report. In addition, differences between the R and Fortran implementations will be discussed later in this report. The NGA models have established a new baseline for seismic hazard assessments, and they have been incorporated into the most recent national seismic hazard maps published by the U.S. Geological Survey (Petersen and others, 2008). However, many of the new models are significantly more complicated than previous GMPEs and, therefore, require a substantial investment of time to implement and validate. We hope that the scientific and engineering communities find our implementations to be useful in research and practice. Our implementations may be considered as an alternate to the Microsoft Excel spreadsheet implementation available on the PEER NGA project Web site (http://peer.berkeley.edu/ngawest/, last accessed 11 January 2011). The implementations in Fortran and R are more appropriate for performing batch calculations than the implementation in Microsoft Excel. Spreadsheets and Fortran code for some of the individual models also are available on the PEER NGA project Web site; our programs implement the four GMPEs simultaneously. Our programs give the same results as the programs on the PEER NGA Web site, but we offer some additional flexibility of input, additional methods of estimating unknown input parameters, and additional options for output. Although these programs have been used by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Tufts University, and others, no warranty, expressed or implied, is made by Tufts or the USGS as to the accuracy or functioning of the programs and related material, nor shall the fact of distribution constitute any such warranty, and no responsibility is assumed by Tufts or the USGS in connection therewith.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2023

Review and development of best practices for toxicity tests with dreissenid mussels

Since their introduction to North America in the 1980s, research to develop effective control tools for invasive mussels ( Dreissena polymorpha and D. rostriformis bugensis ) has been ongoing across various research institutions using a range of testing methods. Inconsistencies in experimental methods and reporting present challenges for comparing data, repeating experiments, and applying results. The Invasive Mussel Collaborative established the Toxicity Testing Work Group (TTWG) in 2019 to identify “best practices” and guide development of a standard framework for dreissenid mussel toxicity testing protocols. We reviewed the literature related to laboratory-based dreissenid mussel toxicity tests and determined the degree to which standard guidelines have been used and their applicability to dreissenid mussel testing. We extracted detailed methodology from 99 studies from the peer-reviewed and gray literature and conducted a separate analysis for studies using presettlement and postsettlement mussels. We identified specific components of methods and approaches that could be refined or standardized for dreissenid mussels. These components included species identification, collection methods, size/age class distinction, maintenance practices, testing criteria, sample size, response measures, reporting parameters, exposure methods, and mortality criteria. We consulted experts in the field of aquatic toxicology and dreissenid mussel biology on our proposed. The final recommendations contained in the present review are based on published standard guidelines, methods reported in the published and gray literature, and the expertise of TTWG members and an external panel. In addition, our review identifies research needs for dreissenid mussel testing including improved methods for early–life stage testing, comparative data on life stages and between dreissenid mussel species, inclusion of a reference toxicant, and additional testing of nontarget species (i.e., other aquatic organisms). Environ Toxicol Chem 2023;42:1649–1666. © 2023 His Majesty the King in Right of Canada. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC. Reproduced with the permission of the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Canada. This article has been contributed to by U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.

Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry↗
USGS2023

Ecological effects of pinyon-juniper removal in the Western United States—A synthesis of scientific research, January 2014–March 2021

Executive Summary Increasing density of pinyon ( Pinus spp. ) and juniper ( Juniperus spp. ) woodlands (hereinafter “pinyon-juniper”), as well as expansion of these woodlands into adjacent shrublands and grasslands, has altered ecosystem function and wildlife habitat across large areas of the interior western United States. Although there are many natural and human-caused drivers of woodland infilling and expansion, restoration of sagebrush ( Artemisia spp. ) habitat through removal of pinyon-juniper is considered an urgent management objective in many locations, particularly in support of sagebrush-dependent wildlife species of conservation concern. In December 2020, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) established the Pinyon-Juniper Management Categorical Exclusion (PJCX) to expedite the regulatory process for pinyon-juniper removal projects on public lands, largely intended to benefit mule deer ( Odocoileus hemionus ) and greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ) habitats. During final preparation of this report, the BLM discontinued use of the PJCX (as of November, 2022), but the pinyon-juniper tree removal techniques assessed in this report are commonly used and understanding their effects remains relevant to land use planning. To address areas of uncertainty relative to potential ecological effects of the PJCX, we conducted a review of the peer-reviewed science literature to better understand the likely responses of vegetation, environmental (for example, soils), and wildlife variables to specific tree removal techniques permitted by the PJCX. In brief, the PJCX permitted removal of trees by either manual cutting, mechanical cutting, or mastication; allowed certain methods to redistribute or remove resulting tree biomass after treatment; and prohibited broadcast burning, roadbuilding, removal of old-growth, and seeding of non-native species. Specifically, we conducted our review to address the following questions: How will PJCX removal techniques affect plant communities, soils, and abiotic resources? How do these pinyon-juniper removal techniques affect wildlife communities, including both woodland- and sagebrush-dependent species? What are the potential ecological implications of different pinyon-juniper removal treatment types and implementation strategies (for example, treatment sizes) over time? What are the most important gaps in our scientific understanding of how treatments might affect targeted ecosystems over space and time (for example, potential effects of climate change)? To answer these questions, we considered studies related to pinyon-juniper ecosystems, focusing on research that occurred over a large portion of the interior western United States that is the primary focus of the PJCX. We also focused on papers published from 2014 onward, to avoid excessive overlap with other recent reviews on pinyon-juniper management effects. Using strict criteria, including only considering research that tested responses for statistical significance, we identified 48 papers that primarily examined treatment effects on vegetation and other environmental variables (1,709 responses), and 11 papers that addressed effects on wildlife (132 responses). Responses to the PJCX-permitted treatments were summarized as either positive (that is, a significant increase), negative (that is, a significant decrease), or non-significant (that is, no significant difference). Responses were assigned to categories (for example, Native Annual Grass/Forb Abundance) and hierarchical treatment levels. We found that there were large proportions of non-significant responses among all categories combined, with roughly half or more of all responses non-significant (48 percent for wildlife, 60 percent for vegetation-environmental), comparable to other recent systematic reviews of pinyon-juniper treatment effects. However, we also found that when there were significant responses, some important trends potentially emerged. Important undesirable outcomes included far more positive than negative responses of exotic grass and forb abundance among nearly all treatment types. Cutting treatments were also more likely to decrease biocrust cover and microbial activity. Potentially beneficial outcomes included mostly positive responses among sagebrush obligate species, including more positive than negative responses for mule deer and sage-grouse. Some treatment types (for example, mastication) also resulted in more positive than negative responses for native grasses and forbs (although, non-significant responses were the majority). We also highlighted many limitations of this review, including how responses often come from few studies, and how some response-treatment category combinations lack adequate response data. Moreover, the existing research is often insufficient to address many key questions about treatment effects, largely owing to short time-scales and limited spatial extents of observations, which do not match the size of treatments being implemented by land managers, nor capture long-term, post-treatment ecological dynamics. We also identify a lack of research that addresses key interactions that could undermine restoration objectives, including potential effects of climate change and grazing on post-treatment environments. Thus, we emphasize the importance of integrating these factors into future pinyon-juniper treatment research, and we stress the need for use of monitoring programs and research studies that partake in data collection and analysis over long durations and broad spatial scales.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2018

U.S. Geological Survey science for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative—2016 annual report

This is the ninth annual report highlighting U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) science and decision-support activities conducted for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative (WLCI). The activities address specific management needs identified by WLCI partner agencies. In fiscal year (FY) 2016, there were 26 active USGS WLCI science-based projects. Of these 26 projects, one project was new for FY2016, and three were completed by the end of the fiscal year (though final products were still in preparation or review). USGS WLCI projects were grouped under five categories: (1) Baseline Synthesis, (2) Long-Term Monitoring, (3) Effectiveness Monitoring, (4) Mechanistic Studies of Wildlife, and (5) Data and Information Management. Each of these topic areas is designed to address WLCI management needs: identifying key drivers of change, identifying the condition and distribution of key wildlife species and habitats and of species’ habitat requirements, development of an integrated inventory and monitoring strategy, use of emerging technologies and development and testing of innovative methods for maximizing the efficiency and efficacy of monitoring efforts, evaluating the effectiveness of habitat treatment projects, evaluating the responses of wildlife to development, and developing a data clearinghouse and information management framework to support and provide access to results of most USGS WLCI projects. In FY2016, we assisted with updating the WLCI Conservation Action Plan and associated databases as part of the Comprehensive Assessment, and we also assisted with the Bureau of Land Management 2015 WLCI annual report. By the end of FY2016, we completed or had nearly completed assessments of WLCI energy and mineral resources and had submitted a manuscript on modeled effects of oil and gas development on wildlife to a peer-reviewed journal. We also initiated a study on the effects of wind energy on wildlife in the WLCI region. A USGS circular on WLCI long-term monitoring was in review at the end of the fiscal year, and seven projects monitoring water and vegetation (including changes in sagebrush cover and patterns of sagebrush mortality) continued through the year. USGS scientists continued many projects in FY2016 that evaluate the effectiveness of habitat conservation actions (including sagebrush, cheatgrass, and aspen habitat treatments) and provide tools in support of mechanistic studies of wildlife. In FY2016, USGS scientists, along with university and State partners, continued work on five focal wildlife species/communities (pygmy rabbits [ Brachylagus idahoensis ], greater sage grouse , mule deer, sagebrush songbirds, and native fish). In FY2016, the USGS Information Management Team presented information to WLCI scientists on how USGS tools and resources can be used to fulfill the requirements of new USGS policies regarding data release, data management, and data visualization.

Wyoming↗
USGS2011

Diagnostic methodology is critical for accurately determining the prevalence of ichthyophonus infections in wild fish populations

Several different techniques have been employed to detect and identify Ichthyophonus spp. in infected fish hosts; these include macroscopic observation, microscopic examination of tissue squashes, histological evaluation, in vitro culture, and molecular techniques. Examination of the peer-reviewed literature revealed that when more than 1 diagnostic method is used, they often result in significantly different results; for example, when in vitro culture was used to identify infected trout in an experimentally exposed population, 98.7% of infected trout were detected, but when standard histology was used to confirm known infected tissues from wild salmon, it detected ~50% of low-intensity infections and ~85% of high-intensity infections. Other studies on different species reported similar differences. When we examined a possible mechanism to explain the disparity between different diagnostic techniques, we observed non-random distribution of the parasite in 3-dimensionally visualized tissue sections from infected hosts, thus providing a possible explanation for the different sensitivities of commonly used diagnostic techniques. Based on experimental evidence and a review of the peer-reviewed literature, we have concluded that in vitro culture is currently the most accurate diagnostic technique for determining infection prevalence of Ichthyophonus, particularly when the exposure history of the population is not known.

Journal of Parasitology↗
USGS2026

Appendix 6: Overview of iPOM 2.0: Updates to wolf abundance estimation in Montana

Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MFWP) uses the integrated Patch Occupancy Model (iPOM) to estimate statewide and regional wolf abundance. During the early years of recovery, wolf abundance was tracked using minimum counts. As the population increased, limitations of this method became apparent, motivating development of a model-based approach for estimating abundance. iPOM development began in 2006, was operationalized in 2013, and has been used in its current form (iPOM 1.0) since 2021. Since its inception, iPOM has been developed and presented as an adaptive modeling framework intended to evolve as new data and analytical methods become available1. Here, we briefly present ongoing work to produce the next iteration of iPOM, hereafter iPOM 2.0, and summarize major model updates and resulting preliminary wolf abundance estimates. iPOM uses models for occupancy, territory size, and pack size, along with monitoring data collected by MFWP wolf specialists and potential wolf sightings reported by deer and elk hunters during the 5-week general rifle season each Nov-Dec. These monitoring data, wolf sightings, and covariates for habitat and survey effort are used to model occupancy of packs on a statewide grid of 600-km 2 cells. The area used by wolves is then estimated as each cell’s occupancy estimate multiplied by grid cell area. iPOM estimates pack abundance by dividing this area by predicted territory sizes, and in-pack wolf abundance by multiplying pack abundance by estimated group size. This is combined with a lone wolf rate to estimate total wolf abundance (see Sells et al. 1 for a full description of iPOM 1.0). This technical summary provides a high-level overview of the proposed iPOM updates and their implications for wolf abundance estimates. The estimates presented here represent results as of June 2026 and are provided to inform upcoming discussions surrounding harvest management and regulations (e.g., season dates, quotas, methods). Results are preliminary and remain subject to final model refinement and peer review.

Montana↗
USGS2012

Status and trends of land change in the Western United States--1973 to 2000

Preface U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Professional Paper 1794–A is the first in a four-volume series on the status and trends of the Nation’s land use and land cover, providing an assessment of the rates and causes of land-use and land-cover change in the Western United States between 1973 and 2000. Volumes B, C, and D provide similar analyses for the Great Plains, the Midwest–South Central United States, and the Eastern United States, respectively. The assessments of land-use and land-cover trends are conducted on an ecoregion-by-ecoregion basis, and each ecoregion assessment is guided by a nationally consistent study design that includes mapping, statistical methods, field studies, and analysis. Individual assessments provide a picture of the characteristics of land change occurring in a given ecoregion; in combination, they provide a framework for understanding the complex national mosaic of change and also the causes and consequences of change. Thus, each volume in this series provides a regional assessment of how (and how fast) land use and land cover are changing, and why. The four volumes together form the first comprehensive picture of land change across the Nation. Geographic understanding of land-use and land-cover change is directly relevant to a wide variety of stakeholders, including land and resource managers, policymakers, and scientists. The chapters in this volume present brief summaries of the patterns and rates of land change observed in each ecoregion in the Western United States, together with field photographs, statistics, and comparisons with other assessments. In addition, a synthesis chapter summarizes the scope of land change observed across the entire Western United States. The studies provide a way of integrating information across the landscape, and they form a critical component in the efforts to understand how land use and land cover affect important issues such as the provision of ecological goods and services and also the determination of risks to, and vulnerabilities of, human communities. Results from this project also are published in peer-reviewed journals, and they are further used to produce maps of change and other tools for land management, as well as to provide inputs for carbon-cycle modeling and other climate change research. This report is only one of the products produced by USGS on land-use and land-cover change in the United States. Other reports and land-cover statistics are available online at http://landcovertrends.usgs.gov .

Professional Paper↗
USGS2015

Status and trends of land change in the Great Plains of the United States--1973 to 2000

Preface U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Professional Paper 1794–B is the second in a four-volume series on the status and trends of the Nation’s land use and land cover, providing an assessment of the rates and causes of land-use and land-cover change in the Great Plains of the United States between 1973 and 2000. Volumes A, C, and D provide similar analyses for the Western United States, the Midwest–South Central United States, and the Eastern United States, respectively. The assessments of land-use and land-cover trends are conducted on an ecoregion-by-ecoregion basis, and each ecoregion assessment is guided by a nationally consistent study design that includes mapping, statistical methods, field studies, and analysis. Individual assessments provide a picture of the characteristics of land change occurring in a given ecoregion; in combination, they provide a framework for understanding the complex national mosaic of change and also the causes and consequences of change. Thus, each volume in this series provides a regional assessment of how (and how fast) land use and land cover are changing, and why. The four volumes together form the first comprehensive picture of land change across the Nation. Geographic understanding of land-use and land-cover change is directly relevant to a wide variety of stakeholders, including land and resource managers, policymakers, and scientists. The chapters in this volume present brief summaries of the patterns and rates of land change observed in each ecoregion in the Great Plains of the United States, together with field photographs, statistics, and comparisons with other assessments. In addition, a synthesis chapter summarizes the scope of land change observed across the entire Great Plains of the United States. The studies provide a way of integrating information across the landscape, and they form a critical component in the efforts to understand how land use and land cover affect important issues such as the provision of ecological goods and services and also the determination of risks to, and vulnerabilities of, human communities. Results from this project also are published in peer-reviewed journals, and they are further used to produce maps of change and other tools for land management, as well as to provide inputs for carbon-cycle modeling and other climate change research. This report is only one of the products produced by USGS on land-use and land-cover change in the United States. Other reports and land-cover statistics are available online at http://landcovertrends.usgs.gov .

Great Plains↗
USGS2016

Status and trends of land change in the Eastern United States—1973 to 2000

Preface U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Professional Paper 1794–D is the fourth in a four-volume series on the status and trends of the Nation’s land use and land cover, providing an assessment of the rates and causes of land-use and land-cover change in the Eastern United States between 1973 and 2000. Volumes A, B, and C provide similar analyses for the Western United States, the Great Plains of the United States, and the Midwest–South Central United States, respectively. The assessments of land-use and land-cover trends are conducted on an ecoregion-by-ecoregion basis, and each ecoregion assessment is guided by a nationally consistent study design that includes mapping, statistical methods, field studies, and analysis. Individual assessments provide a picture of the characteristics of land change occurring in a given ecoregion; in combination, they provide a framework for understanding the complex national mosaic of change and also the causes and consequences of change. Thus, each volume in this series provides a regional assessment of how (and how fast) land use and land cover are changing, and why. The four volumes together form the first comprehensive picture of land change across the Nation. Geographic understanding of land-use and land-cover change is directly relevant to a wide variety of stakeholders, including land and resource managers, policymakers, and scientists. The chapters in this volume present brief summaries of the patterns and rates of land change observed in each ecoregion in the Eastern United States, together with field photographs, statistics, and comparisons with other assessments. In addition, a synthesis chapter summarizes the scope of land change observed across the entire Eastern United States. The studies provide a way of integrating information across the landscape, and they form a critical component in the efforts to understand how land use and land cover affect important issues such as the provision of ecological goods and services and also the determination of risks to, and vulnerabilities of, human communities. Results from this project also are published in peer-reviewed journals, and they are further used to produce maps of change and other tools for land management, as well as to provide inputs for carbon-cycle modeling and other climate change research. This report is only one of the products produced by USGS on land-use and land-cover change in the United States. Other reports and land-cover statistics are available online at http://landcovertrends.usgs.gov .

Professional Paper↗
USGS2015

Pre-fieldwork surveys

In sea-level studies, initial surveys at the office or library can increase a project’s likelihood of success. Pre-fieldwork surveys should begin with a thorough review of prior research literature that appraises available data, identifies data gaps, and places the project objectives into a broader scientific context. Whereas peer reviewed journal articles may contain a wealth of research findings, often the most useful maps, historical documents, images, and other data critical for sea-level research are discovered by searching government files, libraries, museums, unpublished reports, or, increasingly, online digital data collections.

Book chapter↗
USGS2005

A Science Framework for Connecticut River Watershed Sustainability

Introduction: This document outlines a research framework for water resource managers and land-use planners in the four-state Connecticut River Watershed (CRW). It specifically focuses on developing the decision-support tools and data needed by managers in the watershed. The purpose of the Science Framework is to identify critical research issues and information required to better equip managers to make decisions on desirable changes in the CRW. This Science Framework is the result of a cooperative project between the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the University of Massachusetts at Amherst (UMass-Amherst), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). The cooperative project was guided by a Science Steering Committee (SC) and included several focus groups, a 70-person workshop in September 2004, and an open collaborative process by which the workshop outcomes were synthesized, written up, and then progressively refined through peer review. This document is the product of that collaborative process.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2016

Science information to support Missouri River Scaphirhynchus albus (pallid sturgeon) effects analysis

The Missouri River Pallid Sturgeon Effects Analysis (EA) was commissioned by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to develop a foundation of understanding of how pallid sturgeon ( Scaphirhynchus albus ) population dynamics are linked to management actions in the Missouri River. The EA consists of several steps: (1) development of comprehensive, conceptual ecological models illustrating pallid sturgeon population dynamics and links to management actions and other drivers; (2) compilation and assessment of available scientific literature, databases, and models; (3) development of predictive, quantitative models to explore the system dynamics and population responses to management actions; and (4) analysis and assessment of effects of system operations and actions on species’ habitats and populations. This report addresses the second objective, compilation and assessment of relevant information. Scientific information on pallid sturgeon and its environment has grown substantially during the last decade. Presently available (2015) information indicates that stocked sturgeon are surviving and growing, and that wild and hatchery sturgeon are spawning in the wild. However, natural recruitment to age-1 and older has not been detected since systematic sampling began in 2005. Population models indicate the sensitivity of population growth to certain demographic variables, in particular early-life stage survival and perhaps adult fecundity. This report documents the existing population models for the pallid sturgeon, and the substantial quantities of information developed through the Pallid Sturgeon Population Assessment Program (PSPAP), the Habitat Assessment and Monitoring Program (HAMP), the Comprehensive Sturgeon Research Project (CSRP), range-wide genetics databases, and related research studies. The reference database compiled for the EA consists of over 190 peer-reviewed documents specifically related to pallid sturgeon and over 12,000 references on the Missouri River system and related species. Notwithstanding the large quantity of information available, the EA faces challenges in synthesizing the information into useful, quantitative models. In particular, critical demographic parameters for population models remain uncertain and the functional relationships between the two main categories of physical management action—changes in flow regime and reengineering channel form—and pallid sturgeon survival responses are obscure. In addition, there is an overarching uncertainty about how physical management actions interact with propagation management actions in view of evolving understanding of genetic structuring of the pallid sturgeon population. Synthesis efforts are also challenged by the fragmentation of information sources among projects and agencies; one objective of this report is to facilitate future assessments by providing documentation of what information is available and where.

Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North D↗
USGS2025

The importance of sampling design for unbiased estimation of survival using joint live-recapture and live resight models

Survival is a key life history parameter that can inform management decisions and basic life history research. Because true survival is often confounded with emigration from the study area, many studies are forced to estimate apparent survival (i.e., probability of surviving and remaining inside the study area), which can be much lower than true survival for highly mobile species. One method for estimating true survival is the Barker joint live-recapture/live-resight (JLRLR) model, which combines capture data from a study area (hereafter the ‘capture site’) with resighting data from a broader geographic area. This model assumes that live resights occur throughout the entire area where animals can disperse to and this assumption is often not met in practice. Here we use simulation to evaluate survival bias from a JLRLR model under study design scenarios that differ in the site selection for resights: global, random, fixed including the capture site, and fixed excluding the capture site. Simulation results indicate that fixed designs that included the capture site showed negative survival bias, whereas fixed designs that excluded the capture site exhibited positive survival bias. The magnitude of the bias was dependent on movement and survival, where scenarios with high survival and frequent movement had minimal bias. In an effort to help minimize bias, we developed a multistate version of the JLRLR and demonstrated reductions in survival bias compared to the single-state version for most designs. Our results suggest minimizing bias can be accomplished by: 1) using a random resight design when feasible if global sampling is not possible, 2) using the multistate JLRLR model when appropriate, 3) including the capture site in the resight sampling frame when possible, and 4) reporting survival as apparent survival if fixed sites are used for resight with the single state JLRLR model.

Peer Community Journal↗
USGS2024

Evaluating effectiveness of restoration to address current stressors to riverine fish

River restoration programmes with the goal of conserving and rehabilitating inland fishes have a multi-decadal history, but evaluation and synthesis of past restoration actions have been limited by a lack of monitoring and reporting. Given that calls for both monitoring and systematic reviews of restoration have increased, we were interested in the influence that restoration has had on improving conditions for riverine fishes resulting from long-standing and increasingly prominent stressors. Our objectives were to (1) identify which stressors were targeted in river restoration efforts, (2) determine the proportion of published studies that articulate restoration goals and develop comparative monitoring designs for assessing the effects of restoration on fishes, and (3) conduct a meta-analysis to synthesise fish responses to restoration projects. We assessed restoration effectiveness for increasing fish density and richness from peer-reviewed papers published over the past decade using a global systematic review and meta-analysis. We found that restoration actions addressed major stressors primarily by improving in-stream habitat (37%), increasing in-stream longitudinal connectivity (26%) and increasing lateral floodplain connections (9%). Although 81% of studies had comparative monitoring designs (i.e., before/after and control/impact) and stated restoration goals, only 40% of those studies reported sufficient data to be included in the meta-analysis. Projects which increased in-stream connectivity had the largest positive effect size on fish density and richness compared to in-stream habitat improvements and increasing floodplain connections. Time since restoration and restoration size (i.e., geographical footprint) were not strong predictors of fish response effect sizes. Restoration effectiveness was highly variable among project types. Authors of studies included in the meta-analysis often identified spatial or temporal scale of monitoring, overriding catchment conditions, and recolonisation potential as sources of variability and effectiveness in restoration outcomes. Systematic reporting of these and other covariates may help guide processes in restoration evaluation and provide valuable research insights. Despite increased emphasis on monitoring, incomplete data reporting limited the number of studies that could be included for quantitative meta-analysis. Persistent emphasis on setting specific criteria (e.g., measurable outcomes of fish response) for restoration goals, project monitoring, data reporting, information sharing and collaborative projects is likely to continue to improve understanding of restoration effectiveness transferable to future endeavours. Our results can be used to support river restoration practitioners with evidence-based information to evaluate the cost–benefit ratio of competing restoration priorities, and inform restoration planning and implementation for riverine fish.

Freshwater Biology↗
USGS2023

Synthesis of climate and ecological science to support grassland management priorities in the North Central Region

Grasslands in the Great Plains are of ecological, economic, and cultural importance in the United States. In response to a need to understand how climate change and variability will impact grassland ecosystems and their management in the 21st century, the U.S. Geological Survey North Central Climate Adaptation Science Center led a synthesis of peer-reviewed climate and ecology literature relevant to grassland management in the North Central Region (including Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas). This synthesis was done to begin to address grassland managers’ information needs and identify research gaps. This open-file report summarizes the impacts of climate change and variability on temperature, water availability, wildfire, vegetation, wildlife, large-bodied ruminants, grazing, and land-use change and the implications for grassland management in the North Central region. This open-file report also identifies areas in which further research is needed. U.S. Geological Survey funded this project.

Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota,↗
USGS2026

Colocating artificial intelligence data centers with energy infrastructure on Federal public lands—A science synthesis and spatial analysis to inform decision making

Executive Summary Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming industries and economies, creating an urgent need to strategically plan for the energy and infrastructure required to support increasing AI use. U.S. Federal agencies and bureaus have been directed to explore ways to accelerate permitting, development, and deployment of energy resources and AI technologies, including encouraging the colocation of energy infrastructure and data centers. To inform these initiatives, this report synthesizes relevant scientific information and presents a spatial analysis of existing energy infrastructure and data centers on or near U.S. Federal public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The purpose of this science synthesis and spatial analysis is to provide the BLM with foundational information for considering potential colocation of data centers with energy infrastructure on Federal public lands to support evidence-based decisions. Additionally, this report provides insight into current (2025) and potential future energy demands by providing projections of a range of potential future environmental conditions relevant to maintaining industry-recommended cooling temperature standards necessary for efficient data center operations. As a part of this effort, a rapid response literature review was conducted of the best available science on the topic of data center development and energy infrastructure in July–August 2025, supplemented by additional resources recommended by U.S. Federal agency and bureau subject matter experts (hereafter experts; including the U.S. Department of Energy National Laboratory of the Rockies) and peer reviewers. To better understand current conditions relevant to AI data center development, a spatial analysis was conducted across Alaska and 11 States in the Western United States, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming, all of which contain extensive BLM-managed surface lands (hereafter referred to as “BLM lands”) that could be considered for the colocation of energy infrastructure and AI data centers. This effort identified BLM lands within 10 miles of existing transmission lines, consistent with methods used in previous BLM programmatic environmental impact statements. This report describes the types of data centers operating within the United States, which vary in ownership, size, technology, and proximity to end users. This report then outlines the primary considerations of data center development, including reliable energy supply, natural resources (such as water availability to support cooling requirements), and relevant policy and regulatory considerations. Energy supply considerations are pivotal for data center operation. Between 2014 and 2018, data centers in the United States accounted for nearly 2 percent of the Nation’s total electricity consumption, and data center energy consumption is projected to increase from 2 to 6.7–12 percent of total U.S. electricity use by 2028. These energy requirements necessitate careful consideration of energy supply when considering potentially suitable locations for data center development. Experts anticipate that an increase in renewable energy generation will likely support most potential future power demand needs, including for data centers, followed by increases in natural gas, nuclear, and geothermal energy production. Additional capacity in the form of battery storage will likely not generate electricity, but may improve the reliability and flexibility of supply, helping to ensure that growing data center loads can be met. However, the U.S. Department of Energy estimates that the United States will need, on average, 57 percent more energy transmission infrastructure by 2035 to account for the growing power demand introduced by development such as data centers. Cooling server equipment in data centers requires large amounts of electricity and water, and this demand can be exacerbated by hot and humid conditions. Energy efficient water-based cooling technologies may reduce electricity consumption onsite but require more water consumption. This additional water demand has the potential to increase water stress and competition with other users. As such, developing data centers will likely need a thorough assessment of current and potential future water availability, as well as consideration of how water demand may change across other sectors. Data center development involves policy and regulatory considerations, as projects must undergo environmental review and authorization processes that can take 18–24 months. Coordinating these environmental reviews and authorizations with other energy development projects, such as building new transmission lines, may cause additional delays. Recent efforts by the U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Department of the Interior aim to expedite environmental reviews and authorizations and improve coordination across agencies. The spatial analysis identified 771 existing AI data centers and more than 3,300 power plants. The spatial analysis found that 6 percent of AI data centers and 22 percent of power plants in the Western United States were on or within 1 mile of BLM lands, and California had the largest number of facilities. Most existing AI data centers were near high-voltage transmission lines and close to power plants, supporting efficient energy delivery. More than 90,000,000 acres of BLM lands were within 10 miles of existing high-voltage transmission lines, representing 38 percent of BLM lands in the study area. Available transmission infrastructure and the overlap with BLM lands varied by State, and Alaska had limited overlap compared to the rest of the Western United States. To operate most efficiently, data center temperatures must be at or below 80.6 degrees Fahrenheit. This analysis of future temperature and precipitation projections indicated increasing cooling demands for data centers, particularly in Arizona, California, and Nevada, where rising temperatures are expected to increase energy and operational costs while potentially stressing current regional electrical grid infrastructure. This report highlights relevant energy supply, natural resources, and regulatory considerations for data center development on BLM lands. This report does not provide a comprehensive ecological, regulatory, land suitability, or permitting analysis. The factors described here are contextual considerations only and are not intended to identify, rank, quantify, or recommend optimal areas for data center colocation. This spatial analysis focused solely on energy considerations relevant to data centers and did not consider water availability, critical habitats, BLM National Conservation Lands, areas of cultural or historical significance, and other sensitive resources. These topics are recognized as critical but were not within the scope of this science synthesis and spatial analysis.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2002

Values and attitudes of National Wildlife Refuge managers and biologists; Report to respondents

The issues affecting natural resource management, the society in which natural resource management occurs, natural resource agency personnel, and the publics they serve have changed in recent decades. Previous studies of Refuge professionals in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) have revealed that employees lack strong commitment to the current organizational structure, were frustrated with the lack of communication within the agency and felt there was a need for strong leadership (PEER 1998, 1999). These results prompted the authors to have further questions about refuge management in the Fish and Wildlife Service. What do employees value about their agency? Is there a difference in values between refuge managers and biologists and if so, what are those differences and what influences those differences? Recently, there has been speculation that changes in society and the demographic makeup of natural resource professionals has caused a paradigm shift for natural resource management (Ballard 2002; Brown and Harris 1992abc, 2000; Maestas 2002). But, there has been little work assessing the values, attitudes or behaviors of natural resource professionals to determine if a paradigm shift is really occurring. Most of the work in the field of values, attitudes, and behaviors has focused on the public and their interaction with environmental management issues; such as, endangered species management (Lybecker et al. 2002; Solomon 1998), human-wildlife conflict (Baker and Fritsch 1997; Chase et al. 1999; Jones and Thomas 1999; Mankin et al. 1999), changes in hunting or trapping regulations (Loker et al. 1998; Manfredo et al. 1999; Whittaker and Torres 1998), or management of public lands (Badalamente et al. 2000). The purpose of this study was to gain a better understanding of the values and attitudes refuge employees have toward natural resources. The goal was to survey National Wildlife Refuge professionals about natural resource management. We surveyed Refuge Managers and Refuge Biologists (n=480) at staffed U.S. National Wildlife Refuges in the contiguous 48 states in the fall of 200 1. We used a modified Dillman design, resulting in a 68% response rate. The objectives of this study were to (1) determine and compare the environmental values of refuge managers and biologists at selected refuges and (2) assess attitudes about various institutional factors (public involvement and planning). Analyses of data revealed that these managers and biologists did not differ substantially in terms of their environmental values. Refuge professionals were supportive of public involvement in planning and management, but hoped to maintain management authority throughout the process. Professionals were skeptical concerning the applicability of long term planning, but were generally supportive of the planning process. Attitudes toward the Service were conflicting: professionals felt that the Service needed to provide better leadership and direction, but that the Refuge System needed to assert its autonomy and independence from the rest of the Service.

Open-File Report↗