SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Environmental Impact Assessment Review”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

124 records · Page 7Linked to original sources

USGS2019

Managed aquifer recharge in snow-fed river basins: What, why and how?

What does climate change mean for snow-fed river basins? Climate change poses unique challenges in snow-fed river basins across the western United States because the majority of water supply originates as snow (Dettinger, Udall, & Georgakakos, 2015). In the Sierra Nevada, recent observations include changes in snow accumulation and snowmelt, and shifts in peak streamflow timing (Barnhart et al., 2016; Hatchett et al., 2017; Kim & Jain, 2010; McCabe, Wolock, & Valentin, 2018; Mote, Li, Lettenmaier, Xiao, & Engel, 2018). Such changes upstream alter surface water deliveries downstream, as well as groundwater recharge utilized as both primary and supplemental water supply (Godsey et al., 2014; Harpold, 2016; Jasechko et al., 2014). basin where snowmelt runoff produces substantial water supply to meet diverse agricultural, environmental and urban water demand (Figure 1). The East and West Forks join at the confluence of the Carson River near the north end of the Carson Valley, a rich agricultural region (40,000 acres) that grows primarily alfalfa hay. The majority of irrigators rely on surface water delivered through a network of earthen ditches constructed in the mid-19th and early 20th centuries. Flow through these earthen networks and the practice of flood irrigation contribute significantly to groundwater recharge. Because no upstream surface water reservoirs exist, snowpack that accumulates through winter and melts slowly through spring has acted as a “natural” reservoir, providing ample supply through the summer irrigati agricultural, environmental and urban water demand (Figure 1). The East and West Forks join at the confluence of the Carson River near the north end of the season. Some irrigators have permitted access to supplemental groundwater that is useful during periods of drought for augmenting shortfalls in surface water delivery. Groundwater is the primary source of municipal and industrial water supply for surrounding communities (e.g., Carson City, Minden, Gardnerville, Dayton). Across the basin, water use is highly regulated through federal, tribal, state and local water-sharing agreements based on prior appropriation doctrine (Wilds, 2014). Carson River surface water allocations follow the Alpine Decree, initiated by the United States Department of Interior in 1925 and signed into law in 1980, following 55 years of litigation, to adjudicate surface water rights to individual parties (NDWP, 1999). The Alpine Decree acknowledges return flows to lower river segments, and thus each river segment is distributed autonomously. This means that the most junior water right on an upper segment can be fulfilled before considering the most senior water right on a lower segment. Ultimately, the ruling is at the discretion of the Federal Water Master to satisfy the needs of each water right Downstream of Carson Valley, surface water flows are stored in Lahontan Reservoir, the nation’s first desert reclamation project (est. 1906), where releases are managed to meet the Newland’s Project irrigation water demand and for environmental use on the Stillwater National Wildlife Refuge. Flows from the Carson River are supplemented through diversions from the Truckee River via the Truckee Canal, resulting in a trans-basin water supply system. How is the Water for the Seasons research program informing snow-fed river basin communities? In the Truckee-Carson River System, researchers and local water managers are working together to assess climate change impacts to water supply and explore how model simulations can produce useful information to support local climate adaptation. Twelve key water managers represent agricultural, environmental, urban and regulatory water-use communities, and bring to the table diverse input and perspectives on how to adapt to climate change. Hydrologists use this input to craft scenarios and simulations that meet the information needs of local water managers. Biannual workshops provide an opportunity for information exchange, where researchers and key water managers generate new knowledge of river system function. That is, researchers share results of models that examine the physical potential, and managers validate the on-the-ground potential, further informing the research process. Coincident to this research program, the region faced a prolonged drought period (2012-2016) with historically low snowpack, followed by a historic wet year (2017) that brought winter and spring flooding as a result of atmospheric river storm events (Sterle et al., 2019). For the Carson River, an important observation made by managers was that peak streamflow that had traditionally coincided with peak irrigation demands, had shifted to earlier in the spring, with summer baseflow also decreasing (Sterle & Singletary, 2017). Managers shared with researchers concerns over potential future impacts that changing snowpack will have on surface water deliveries and reliance on groundwater, as the region’s population and economy continue to grow. During workshops that occurred over this period, local water managers and researchers discussed ways to evaluate water distribution and use that honors the existing legal framework and accounts for changing snowpack regimes (amount, rain versus snow, timing). In response to managers growing interest, researchers introduced the concept of managed aquifer recharge as one potential strategy to adapt and enhance regional water sustainability. What is managed aquifer recharge? Simply stated, managed aquifer recharge is the intentional recharge of structures to spread water over agricultural lands, allowing water to naturally infiltrate into the groundwater system (Bouwer, 1999; Niswonger et al., 2017). The latter may occur during the irrigation season by applying excess water, or during the nonirrigation season when evapotranspiration losses are low. Figure 2 illustrates managed aquifer recharge in a snow-fed river basin, where streamflow generated from snowmelt runoff is diverted to agricultural lands to recharge the aquifer. Such flood irrigation practices, including water delivery through earthen ditch networks, provide incidental but significant aquifer recharge through seepage and deep drainage beneath fields (Niswonger, Allander, & Jeton, 2014). The effects of managed aquifer recharge can vary depending on the location and intensity of practice. For example, implementing managed aquifer recharge water into the groundwater system (Dillon, 2009). This differs from the incidental recharge that may occur as part of normal irrigation practices. Managed recharge may occur by injection into the aquifer through existingwells, or by using existing conveyance adjacent to/along the river’s floodplain has the potential to enhance late-season instream flows due to increased return flows, resulting in greater downstream deliveries as well as improving ecological conditions (Niswonger et al., 2017). Implementing managed aquifer recharge away from the river’s floodplain has the potential to enhance groundwater supply which is increasingly relied upon during surface water shortage (Green et al., 2011), by storing water in available aquifer space in the deep aquifer. At the basin scale, managed aquifer recharge may lead to regional groundwater sustainability. Is the Carson River Basin a candidate for managed aquifer recharge? The physical limitations to implementing managed aquifer recharge in the Carson River Basin hinges on three key factors. The first factor relates to the physical connectivity between rivers and streams, and the irrigation delivery network of canals and ditches that divert water to agricultural lands (Niswonger et al., 2017). In the Carson River Basin the mechanisms for getting water to fields is already in place. Thus, intentionally routing high flows that occur in wet years through this system during the nonirrigation season would mimic what occurs naturally during the irrigation season. The second factor relates to the occurrence of atmospheric river storm events that deliver large amounts of precipitation to the region, much greater than average (Dettinger et al., 2015). With increased frequency and intensity projected under a warmer climate, such events have the potential to produce excess water over short periods of time that could be stored through mechanisms such as managed aquifer recharge (Niswonger et al., 2017). The third factor relates to the change in snowpack accumulation and shifts in snowmelt timing observed elsewhere in the Sierra Nevada (e.g., Godsey et al., 2014; Mote et al., 2018). Having a mechanism in place to maximize use of earlier snowmelt and shifts in streamflow timing could be advantageous and enhance regional groundwater sustainability. As part of the Water for the Seasons study, a hypothetical scenario was developed to determine the feasibility of managed aquifer recharge in the Carson River Basin, assuming no legal constraints. During “wet” or above-average water years, irrigators in the Upper Carson Valley would divert high flows and spread water over agricultural lands during the nonirrigation season. Assuming flows are abundant and “early,” diversions would begin prior to the growing season, when water would otherwise flow downstream to the Lahontan Reservoir. During “dry” years or drought periods, when surface water availability is less, irrigators in the Upper Carson Valley could augment surface water shortages with groundwater, allowing available surface water flows to flow downstream. Researchers hypothesize the amount of water has the potential to boost baseflow to support environmental instream flows, for example. What concerns have local water managers expressed? The hypothetical managed aquifer recharge scenario was presented to water managers in a workshop setting. Presentations included an overview of the hydrologic and operations modeling tools used to evaluate managed aquifer recharge by simulating the timing and distribution of water in the upper watershed. Specifically, in the Upper Carson Valley, a hydrologic model (GSFLOW) simulates streamflow driven by snowmelt, and surface and groundwater interactions, while a river basin operations model (MODSIM) allocates water according to the prior appropriation doctrine in the basin (see Figure 1) (Morway, Niswonger, & Triana, 2016; Niswonger et al., 2017). Integrating these two modeling tools advances the evaluation of climate impacts on water availability in agricultural communities and the resulting impacts of alternative management strategies (Morway et al., 2016). When asked about the viability of managed aquifer recharge, the perspectives of 11 managers varied (Figure 3). Regardless of rating, all managers questioned, “How would thisreally work?” Several managers questioned whether models could simulate the connectivity between surface and groundwater to accurately quantify changes to instream flow. Others raised concerns that managed aquifer recharge violates the Alpine Decree and Nevada Water Law. Still others requested researchers consider alternatives that could work within the confines of current (2019) water law. Managers posed specific questions that should be considered when evaluating the potential for managed aquifer recharge. For example: What triggers implementation of managed aquifer recharge?How “high” or “low” must annual flows be to initiate managed aquifer recharge? When in the water year is this determined? Where exactly in the Carson Valley is managed aquiferre charge possible? For example, what areas away from the floodplain could ensure long-term storage? Can model simulations quantify potential benefits and consequences system-wide?Would this information support decision-making, such as permitting of additional supplemental groundwater rights? How are researchers going to address managers’ research questions? Managers’ perspectives help to validate the on-the-ground potential of particular strategies and further refine alternative management scenarios. For example, understanding that managers are concerned with oversaturated fields helps researchers to define conditions in the model, such as what defines a wet versus “too” wet type of year and where to focus irrigation for managed aquifer recharge. Incorporating these nuances provides more accurate quantification of the potential benefits and consequences for users across the basin. Modeling is underway to simulate managed aquifer recharge scenarios and explore basin-wide implications. Researchers and local water managers will convene to collaboratively review results and further assess whether this or other strategies could work under the confines of existing water law. Subsequent fact sheets will present these findings.

Nevada↗

USGS2015

Applied Geochemistry Special Issue on Environmental geochemistry of modern mining

Environmental geochemistry is an integral part of the mine-life cycle, particularly for modern mining. The critical importance of environmental geochemistry begins with pre-mining baseline characterization and the assessment of environmental risks related to mining, continues through active mining especially in water and waste management practices, and culminates in mine closure. The enhanced significance of environmental geochemistry to modern mining has arisen from an increased knowledge of the impacts that historical and active mining can have on the environment, and from new regulations meant to guard against these impacts. New regulations are commonly motivated by advances in the scientific understanding of the environmental impacts of past mining. The impacts can be physical, chemical, and biological in nature. The physical challenges typically fall within the purview of engineers, whereas the chemical and biological challenges typically require a multidisciplinary array of expertise including geologists, geochemists, hydrologists, microbiologists, and biologists. The modern mine-permitting process throughout most of the world now requires that potential risks be assessed prior to the start of mining. The strategies for this risk assessment include a thorough characterization of pre-mining baseline conditions and the identification of risks specifically related to the manner in which the ore will be mined and processed, how water and waste products will be managed, and what the final configuration of the post-mining landscape will be. In the Fall 2010, the Society of Economic Geologists held a short course in conjunction with the annual meeting of the Geological Society of America in Denver, Colorado (USA) to examine the environmental geochemistry of modern mining. The intent was to focus on issues that are pertinent to current and future mines, as opposed to abandoned mines, which have been the focus of numerous previous short courses. The geochemical challenges of current and future mines share similarities with abandoned mines, but differences also exist. Mining and ore processing techniques have changed; the environmental footprint of waste materials has changed; environmental protection has become a more integral part of the mine planning process; and most historical mining was done with limited regard for the environment. The 17 papers in this special issue evolved from the Society of Economic Geologists’ short course. The relevant geochemical processes encompass the source, transport, and fate of contaminants related to the life cycle of a mine. Contaminants include metals and other inorganic species derived from geologic sources such as ore and solid mine waste, and substances brought to the site for ore processing, such as cyanide to leach gold. Factors, such as mine-waste mineralogy, hydrologic setting, mine-drainage chemistry, and microbial activity, that affect the hydrochemical risks from mining are reviewed by Nordstrom et al. In another paper, Nordstrom discusses baseline characterization at mine sites in a regulatory framework, and emphasizes the influence of mineral deposits in producing naturally elevated concentrations of many trace elements in surface water and groundwater. Surface water quality in mineralized watersheds is influenced by a number of processes that act on daily (diel) cycles and can produce dramatic variations in trace element concentrations as described by Gammons et al. Pre-mining baseline characterization studies should strive to capture the magnitude of these diel variations. Desbarats et al., using a case study of mine drainage from a gold mine, illustrate how elements that commonly occur as negatively charged species (anions) in solution, such as arsenic as arsenate, behave in an opposite fashion than most metals, which occur as positively charged species (cations). Significant improvement in the understanding of factors that influence the toxicity of metals to aquatic organisms in surface water has highlighted the importance of aqueous chemistry, particularly dissolved organic carbon, as described by Smith et al. Stream sediment contamination is another important pathway for affecting aquatic organisms, as reviewed by Besser et al. Understanding and predicting environmental consequences from mining begins with knowing the mineralogy and mineral reactivity of the ore, the wastes, and of secondary minerals formed later. Jamieson et al. review the importance of mineralogical studies in mine planning and remediation. A number of types of site-specific studies are needed to identify environmental risks related to individual mines. Lapakko reviews the general framework of mine waste characterization studies that are integral to the mine planning process. Hageman et al. present a comparative study of several static tests commonly used to characterize mine waste. The mining and ore processing practices employed at a specific mine site will vary on the basis of the commodities being targeted, the geology of the deposit, the geometry of the deposit, and the mining and ore processing methods used. Thus, these factors, in addition to the waste management practices used, can result in a variety of end-member mine waste features, each of which has its own set of challenges. Open pit mines and underground mines require waste rock to be removed to access ore. Waste rock presents unique problems because the rock is commonly mineralized at sub-economic grades and has not been processed to remove potentially problematic minerals, such as pyrite. Amos et al. examine the salient aspects of the geochemistry of waste rock. Mill tailings – the waste material after ore minerals have been removed – are a volumetrically important solid waste at many mine sites. Their fine grain size and the options for their management make their behavior in the environment distinct from that of waste rock. Lindsay et al. describe some of these differences through three case-study examples. Subaqueous disposal of tailings is another option described by Moncur et al. Cyanide leaching for gold extraction is a common method throughout the world. Johnson describes environmental aspects of cyanidation. Uranium mining presents unique environmental challenges, particularly since in-situ recovery has seen widespread use. Campbell et al. review the environmental geochemistry of uranium mining and current research on bioremediation. Ore concentrates from many types of metal mining undergo a pyrometallurgical technique known as smelting to extract the metal. Slag is the result of smelting, and it may be an environmental liability or a valuable byproduct, as described by Piatak et al. Finally, the open pits that result from surface mining commonly reach below the water table. At the end of mining, these pits may fill to form lakes that become part of the legacy of the mine. Castendyk et al., in two papers, review theoretical aspects of the environmental limnology of pit lakes. They also describe approaches that have been used to model pit lake water balance, wall-rock contributions to pit lake chemistry, pit lake water quality, and limnological processes, such as vertical mixing, through the use of three case studies.

Applied Geochemistry↗

USGS2023

A research agenda for the science of actionable knowledge: Drawing from a review of the most misguided to the most enlightened claims in the science-policy interface literature

Linking science with action affords a prime opportunity to leverage greater societal impact from research and increase the use of evidence in decision-making. Success in these areas depends critically upon processes of producing and mobilizing knowledge, as well as supporting and making decisions. For decades, scholars have idealized and described these social processes in different ways, resulting in numerous assumptions that now variously guide engagements at the interface of science and society. We systematically catalog these assumptions based on prior research on the science-policy interface, and further distill them into a set of 26 claims. We then elicit expert perspectives (n = 16) about these claims to assess the extent to which they are accurate or merit further examination. Out of this process, we construct a research agenda to motivate future scientific research on actionable knowledge, prioritizing areas that experts identified as critical gaps in understanding of the science-society interface. The resulting agenda focuses on how to define success, support intermediaries, build trust, and evaluate the importance of consensus and its alternatives – all in the diverse contexts of science-society-decision-making interactions. We further raise questions about the centrality of knowledge in these interactions, discussing how a governance lens might be generative of efforts to support more equitable processes and outcomes. We offer these suggestions with hopes of furthering the science of actionable knowledge as a transdisciplinary area of inquiry.

Environmental Science & Policy↗

USGS2020

Book review: Proceedings of the First International Snakehead Symposium

Snakehead fishes (family Channidae) are among the most maligned aquatic invasive species in the USA and some other countries where they have been introduced outside of their native range in Asia and Africa. Nevertheless, snakeheads continue to be widely exploited in the live‐food trade in aquaculture and wild‐capture fisheries, are highly sought by anglers, and are also popular in the aquarium trade (Courtenay and Williams 2004). The Northern Snakehead Channa argus is the most widespread of the three channid species that are currently naturalized in the USA. This species has generated much concern and controversy, a situation that is partly fueled by sensational media coverage and B‐grade science fiction horror films, such as “Frankenfish,” “Snakehead Terror,” and “Snakehead Swamp.” Media reports of snakehead introductions are often replete with provocative terms, such as “vicious,” “villain,” “voracious,” “monster,” “diabolical,” and even “ecological Armageddon.” When snakeheads first appeared in natural waters of the USA, fisheries professionals became increasingly interested in their status. Established populations rapidly expanded in the mid‐Atlantic region and Arkansas, with scattered reports of introduced snakeheads from isolated locations in Hawaii, California, North Carolina, Florida, the Upper Midwest, and New England. In 2002, snakeheads were added to the list of injurious fishes under the Lacey Act, thereby prohibiting their importation or transport across state lines without a permit. This symposium was conceived by the editors and other concerned fisheries professionals of the Mississippi River Basin Panel on Aquatic Invasive Species. The mission of the symposium, held in Alexandria, Virginia, in July 2018, was to bring together experts on snakehead biology and ecology and to synthesize existing information into summary papers. In this book, 35 authors contributed to 15 peer‐reviewed articles that detail the current state of knowledge about snakehead introductions in the USA. Additionally, 16 abstracts are included from meeting presentations that were not accompanied by full‐length manuscripts. Also included is a summary of a facilitated symposium panel discussion featuring eight experts representing state and federal natural resource agencies and private fishing organizations. The book is organized into six sections. In the first section (Distribution), three papers provide an overview of the Channa species introduced into the USA and historical accounts of occurrence and dispersal of the Northern Snakehead in the mid‐Atlantic region and Arkansas. The second section (Biology/Ecology) consists of two articles that examine growth and energetics of Northern Snakehead populations and two papers that investigate diet, diel feeding activity, and movement of this species in the Potomac River drainage. The third section (Monitoring/Response) includes a paper that models range expansion of the Northern Snakehead in the southeastern USA based on occurrence data and environmental conditions. Also included in this section is a paper summarizing an environmental DNA study to assess the status and range of the Bullseye Snakehead C. marulius in southern Florida. The fourth section (Management/Control) is comprised of four papers that address harvest, age and growth, and development of a stock–recruitment model to inform management decisions regarding control and mitigation for Northern Snakehead populations in the greater Chesapeake Bay area. The fifth section (Perspectives) includes a paper on the history of snakehead introductions in Japan and a thought‐provoking social commentary on the human dimensions of Northern Snakehead management. Abstracts in the final section provide brief summaries of a diversity of snakehead studies, including aspects of distribution, ecology, behavior, control and monitoring efforts, public outreach, and pathology. The summary of the panel discussion is an engaging dialogue about the challenges of snakehead management in the context of conflicts regarding snakeheads as injurious versus their value as game and food species. Most of this book is focused on the Northern Snakehead. Much has been done to document snakehead distributions and certain aspects of snakehead biology, such as diets, age, and growth. Less research has been devoted to understanding the ecological impacts of snakeheads to native aquatic communities and ecosystems. This book would have benefited from a chapter summarizing the current systematics and diversity of the Channidae to inform fisheries biologists about the morphological characteristics of the family, approximate numbers of genera and species, and taxonomic instability. Exemplifying the latter, recent molecular and morphological evidence indicates uncertainty regarding identification of the feral snakehead population in Florida (Adamson and Britz 2019). Those authors suggest that this population may have originated from western Thailand, a possibility that could have implications for understanding historical pathways of snakehead introductions into the USA. In comparison with many published AFS symposia, this volume is relatively narrow in scope and lacks cohesive integration. It will primarily be of interest to those fisheries professionals engaged in the study of snakeheads as well as other nonnative species for which there are contrasting social values regarding their management: whether to monitor and attempt control or eradication efforts or to maintain populations for harvest as game or food species. The book should serve to identify information gaps and guide future research.

Transactions of the American Fisheries Society↗

USGS2014

Lesser prairie-chicken nest site selection, microclimate, and nest survival in association with vegetation response to a grassland restoration program

Climate models predict that the region of the Great Plains Landscape Conservation Cooperative (GPLCC) will experience increased maximum and minimum temperatures, reduced frequency but greater intensity of precipitation events, and earlier springs. These climate changes along with different landscape management techniques may influence the persistence of the lesser prairie-chicken (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus), a candidate for protection under the Endangered Species Act and a priority species under the GPLCC, in positive or negative ways. The objectives of this study were to conduct (1) a literature review of lesser prairie-chicken nesting phenology and ecology, (2) an analysis of thermal aspects of lesser prairie-chicken nest microclimate data, and (3) an analysis of nest site selection, nest survival, and vegetation response to 10 years of tebuthiuron and/or grazing treatments. We found few reports in the literature containing useful data on the nesting phenology of lesser prairie-chickens; therefore, managers must rely on short-term observations and measurements of parameters that provide some predictive insight into climate impacts on nesting ecology. Our field studies showed that prairie-chickens on nests were able to maintain relatively consistent average nest temperature of 31 °C and nest humidities of 56.8 percent whereas average external temperatures (20.3–35.0 °C) and humidities (35.2–74.9 percent) varied widely throughout the 24 hour (hr) cycle. Grazing and herbicide treatments within our experimental areas were designed to be less intensive than in common practice. We determined nest locations by radio-tagging hen lesser prairie-chickens captured at leks, which are display grounds at which male lesser prairie-chickens aggregate and attempt to attract a female for mating. Because nest locations selected by hen lesser prairie-chicken are strongly associated with the lek at which they were captured, we assessed nesting habitat use on the basis of hens captured at individual leks, and then for all leks pooled. There was no clear pattern of selection for treatment type for nest placement among hens associated with individual leks; however, when hens from all leks were pooled, we found nesting lesser prairie-chickens selected control plots for nesting over plots that were grazed, treated with tebuthiuron, or were both grazed and treated with tebuthiuron. Overall, the probability of a nest surviving the incubation period was 0.57 for this study and did not vary significantly among treatment types. In contrast to nesting preference for untreated habitats, lek use exhibited no noticeable selection of treatment type. Over the 10 years of the habitat management study, there was 91 percent less sand shinnery oak (Quercus havardii) in treated areas than untreated areas. The removal of sand shinnery oak made environmental soil moisture more available for grasses and forbs to germinate and grow. Grasses increased by 149 percent and forbs increased by 257 percent in treated areas as compared to untreated areas throughout the study period. Our combined results, including our habitat selection analysis at the individual lek level, indicated that reduced rates of herbicide and short-duration grazing treatments were not detrimental to nesting lesser prairie-chickens and that populations of lesser prairie-chickens in shrub-dominated ecosystems may benefit from reduced rates of herbicide application and short duration of grazing that results in increased habitat heterogeneity.

New Mexico;Texas↗

USGS2001

The search for reliable aqueous solubility (Sw) and octanol-water partition coefficient (Kow) data for hydrophobic organic compounds; DDT and DDE as a case study

The accurate determination of an organic contaminant’s physico-chemical properties is essential for predicting its environmental impact and fate. Approximately 700 publications (1944–2001) were reviewed and all known aqueous solubilities (S w ) and octanol-water partition coefficients (K ow ) for the organochlorine pesticide, DDT, and its persistent metabolite, DDE were compiled and examined. Two problems are evident with the available database: 1) egregious errors in reporting data and references, and 2) poor data quality and/or inadequate documentation of procedures. The published literature (particularly the collative literature such as compilation articles and handbooks) is characterized by a preponderance of unnecessary data duplication. Numerous data and citation errors are also present in the literature. The percentage of original S w and K ow data in compilations has decreased with time, and in the most recent publications (1994–97) it composes only 6–26 percent of the reported data. The variability of original DDT/DDE S w and K ow data spans 2–4 orders of magnitude, and there is little indication that the uncertainty in these properties has declined over the last 5 decades. A criteria-based evaluation of DDT/DDE S w and K ow data sources shows that 95–100 percent of the database literature is of poor or unevaluatable quality. The accuracy and reliability of the vast majority of the data are unknown due to inadequate documentation of the methods of determination used by the authors. [For example, estimates of precision have been reported for only 20 percent of experimental S w data and 10 percent of experimental K ow data.] Computational methods for estimating these parameters have been increasingly substituted for direct or indirect experimental determination despite the fact that the data used for model development and validation may be of unknown reliability. Because of the prevalence of errors, the lack of methodological documentation, and unsatisfactory data quality, the reliability of the DDT/ DDE S w and K ow database is questionable. The nature and extent of the errors documented in this study are probably indicative of a more general problem in the literature of hydrophobic organic compounds. Under these circumstances, estimation of critical environmental parameters on the basis of S w and K ow (for example, bioconcentration factors, equilibrium partition coefficients) is inadvisable because it will likely lead to incorrect environmental risk assessments. The current state of the database indicates that much greater efforts are needed to: 1) halt the proliferation of erroneous data and references, 2) initiate a coordinated program to develop improved methods of property determination, 3) establish and maintain consistent reporting requirements for physico-chemical property data, and 4) create a mechanism for archiving reliable data for widespread use in the scientific/regulatory community.

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗

USGS1996

Small watershed studies: Analytical approaches for understanding ecosystem response to environmental change

Biogeochemical studies in small watersheds provide an analytical approach to understand how ecosystems respond to natural climatic variations and human-induced environmental change. Small watersheds, usually less than 5 km2, are small enough to permit characterization and understanding of ecosystem processes within relatively simple, homogeneous biological and physical settings; yet they are large enough to incorporate more complex processes and element cycles than can be studied at plot scales. Watersheds comprise discrete hydrochemical environments allowing quantification of hydrologic, element, and energy budgets. Element budgets, or mass balances, can be quantified as the difference between the mass of a solute that enters a watershed in wet and dry deposition and leaves a watershed in streamflow. Element budgets are primary tools used to investigate biogeochemical processes. Monitoring various aspects of element budgets to assess ecosystem health and stability is analogous to measuring the pulse or blood chemistry of a patient. Monitoring streamwater chemistry, basic climate, soil, and biotic variables provide a means to integrate complex biogeochemical processes and evaluate trends in water quality. Small watershed studies provide a scientific basis to develop predictive models of watershed function. Major emphases of small watershed studies include investigation of hydrologic and chemical responses to natural climate variation, anthropogenic stressors, and alternate forest-management practices. The nature and significance of biogeochemical research in small watersheds is reviewed by Moldan and Cerny (1994). The U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, and other federal agencies support several long-term small watershed studies to provide insight into a variety of ecosystem processes. Long-term records are essential to distinguish trends resulting from natural climatic variations or other stressors. The following sites, with noted periods of records, are examples of intensively studied forested watersheds in eastern USA supported by federal agencies: ■ Coweeta Hydrologic Laboratory, North Carolina, (1939-present), Swank and Crossley (1988). ■ Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest, New Hampshire, (1956-present), Bormann and Likens (1979). ■ Sleepers River Research Watershed, Vermont, (1958-present), Shanley et al. (1995). ■ Walker Branch Watershed, Tennessee, (1967-present), Johnson and Van Hook (1989). ■ Catoctin Mountains Research Site, Maryland, (1982-present), Rice and Bricker (1995). ■ Catskill Stream Network, New York, (1983- present), Murdoch and Stoddard (1992). ■ Panola Mountain Research Watershed, Georgia, (1985-present), Huntington et al. (1993). Small watershed studies also provide essential baseline information for understanding variations in water quality and element cycling in "pristine" ecosystems that can be used as benchmarks to evaluate anthropogenic impacts and alternate watershed management practices. This paper provides examples of how analytical tools developed through watershed research provide insight into ecosystem processes and can contribute to the management of watershed resources.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2023

Integrated rangeland fire management strategy actionable science plan completion assessment— Climate and weather topic, 2015–20

Loss and degradation of sagebrush ( Artemisia spp.) rangelands due to an accelerated invasive annual grass-wildfire cycle and other stressors are significant management, conservation, and economic issues in the western U.S. These sagebrush rangelands comprise a unique biome spanning 11 states, support over 350 wildlife species, and provide important ecosystem services that include stabilizing the economies of western communities. Impacts to sagebrush ecosystem processes over large areas due to the annual grass-wildfire cycle necessitated the development of a coordinated, science-based strategy for improving efforts to achieve long-term protection, conservation, and restoration of sagebrush rangelands, which was framed in 2015 under the Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy (IRFMS). Central to this effort was the development of an Actionable Science Plan (Plan) that identified 37 priority science needs (hereinafter, “Needs”) for informing the actions proposed under the five topics (Fire, Invasives, Restoration, Sagebrush and Sage-Grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ), Climate and Weather) that were part of the collective focus of the IRFMS. Notable keys to this effort were identification of the Needs co-produced by managers and researchers, and a focus on resulting science being “actionable.” Substantial investments aimed at fulfilling the Needs identified in the Plan have been made since its release in 2016. While the state of the science has advanced considerably, the extent to which knowledge gaps remain relative to identified Needs is relatively unknown. Moreover, new Needs have likely emerged since the original strategy as results from actionable science reveal new questions and possible (yet untested) solutions. A quantifiable assessment of the progress made on the original science Needs can identify unresolved gaps and new information that can help inform prioritization of future research efforts. This report details a systematic literature review that evaluated how well peer-reviewed journal articles and formal technical reports published between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, addressed four Needs identified under the Climate and Weather topic in the Plan. The topic outlined research Needs broadly focused on understanding the potential effects of climate change on vegetative resilience to inform restoration of sagebrush rangelands. We established the level of progress towards addressing each Need following a standardized set of criteria, and developed summaries detailing how research objectives nested within Needs identified in the Plan (hereinafter, “Next Steps”) were either addressed well, partially addressed or remain outstanding (that is, addressed poorly) in the literature through 2020. Our searches resulted in the inclusion of 92 science products that at least partially addressed a Need identified in the Climate and Weather topic. The Needs that were well and partially addressed included: studies of the complex set of climatic relationships that influence sagebrush rangeland restoration and seeding success; the identification of seed collection areas across the range of environmental variability inhabited by target restoration species; and develop predictive models to assess targeted restoration species’ responses to mid-century climatic conditions. The Need addressed poorly was the identification of native plant species, genotypes and ecotypes, and seed mixes that may be resilient to a changing climate. The information provided in this assessment will assist updating the Plan, and can inform updates of other relevant science planning documents as needed.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2023

Climate change and the global redistribution of biodiversity: Substantial variation in empirical support for expected range shifts

Background Among the most widely predicted climate change-related impacts to biodiversity are geographic range shifts, whereby species shift their spatial distribution to track their climate niches. A series of commonly articulated hypotheses have emerged in the scientific literature suggesting species are expected to shift their distributions to higher latitudes, greater elevations, and deeper depths in response to rising temperatures associated with climate change. Yet, many species are not demonstrating range shifts consistent with these expectations. Here, we evaluate the impact of anthropogenic climate change (specifically, changes in temperature and precipitation) on species’ ranges, and assess whether expected range shifts are supported by the body of empirical evidence. Methods We conducted a Systematic Review, searching online databases and search engines in English. Studies were screened in a two-stage process (title/abstract review, followed by full-text review) to evaluate whether they met a list of eligibility criteria. Data coding, extraction, and study validity assessment was completed by a team of trained reviewers and each entry was validated by at least one secondary reviewer. We used logistic regression models to assess whether the direction of shift supported common range-shift expectations (i.e., shifts to higher latitudes and elevations, and deeper depths). We also estimated the magnitude of shifts for the subset of available range-shift data expressed in distance per time (i.e., km/decade). We accounted for methodological attributes at the study level as potential sources of variation. This allowed us to answer two questions: (1) are most species shifting in the direction we expect (i.e., each observation is assessed as support/fail to support our expectation); and (2) what is the average speed of range shifts? Review findings We found that less than half of all range-shift observations (46.60%) documented shifts towards higher latitudes, higher elevations, and greater marine depths, demonstrating significant variation in the empirical evidence for general range shift expectations. For the subset of studies looking at range shift rates, we found that species demonstrated significant average shifts towards higher latitudes (average = 11.8 km/dec) and higher elevations (average = 9 m/dec), although we failed to find significant evidence for shifts to greater marine depths. We found that methodological factors in individual range-shift studies had a significant impact on the reported direction and magnitude of shifts. Finally, we identified important variation across dimensions of range shifts (e.g., greater support for latitude and elevation shifts than depth), parameters (e.g., leading edge shifts faster than trailing edge for latitude), and taxonomic groups (e.g., faster latitudinal shifts for insects than plants). Conclusions Despite growing evidence that species are shifting their ranges in response to climate change, substantial variation exists in the extent to which definitively empirical observations confirm these expectations. Even though on average, rates of shift show significant movement to higher elevations and latitudes for many taxa, most species are not shifting in expected directions. Variation across dimensions and parameters of range shifts, as well as differences across taxonomic groups and variation driven by methodological factors, should be considered when assessing overall confidence in range-shift hypotheses. In order for managers to effectively plan for species redistribution, we need to better account for and predict which species will shift and by how much. The dataset produced for this analysis can be used for future research to explore additional hypotheses to better understand species range shifts.

Journal of Environmental Evidence↗

USGS2022

Ungulate migration in a changing climate—An initial assessment of climate impacts, management priorities, and science needs

Executive Summary Migratory behavior among ungulates in the Western United States occurs in response to changing forage quality and quantity, weather patterns, and predation risk. As snow melts and vegetation green-up begins in late spring and early summer, many migratory ungulates leave their winter range and move to higher elevation summer ranges to access high-quality forage and areas with vegetative cover for protection during fawning. Ungulates remain on these ranges until the fall when increasing snowfall and decreasing temperatures trigger them to migrate back to their lower elevation winter ranges. While researchers have begun to assess the effects of physical barriers such as roads and energy infrastructure on migration, less attention has been paid to understanding how changing climate conditions might affect ungulate movements and range habitats. Does earlier spring green-up make ungulates leave their winter ranges sooner? Do persistent drought conditions reduce the carrying capacity of seasonal range habitats or lead to shifts in migration pathways? These and other questions remain largely unanswered but could have cascading effects on ungulate population dynamics and migratory behavior. In February 2018, the Secretary of the Interior signed Department of the Interior Secretarial Order 3362 (SO3362), “Improving Habitat Quality in Western Big-Game Winter Range and Migration Corridors.” The order, which focuses on elk, mule deer, and pronghorn in 11 Western States, directs the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the National Park Service (NPS), and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to partner with State wildlife agencies on their priorities and objectives for identifying and conserving ungulate migration corridors and winter-range habitat. The USGS Climate Adaptation Science Centers (CASCs) were established to help managers of the Nation’s fish, wildlife, waters, and lands understand the effects of climate change and adapt to changing conditions. To support the recent Department of the Interior (DOI) emphasis on ungulate migration corridors and winter-range habitat, this report assesses current information on how climate change could affect elk, mule deer, and pronghorn migration. The report synthesizes the drivers of migration, outlines what is known about how climate change might affect these drivers, and summarizes management priorities and science needs related to ungulate migration corridors and range habitat. A review of the literature on ungulate migration shows that the core drivers of spring migration are the timing of spring green-up and snowmelt, and the core driver of fall migration is winter severity. After exploring what is known about how these drivers affect or could be affected by climate change, several pathways through which ungulate migration could be altered were identified: (1) ungulates alter migration timing to better track plant phenology or in response to changes in winter conditions; (2) ungulates change their migration route or distance traveled during migration to accommodate changes in environmental conditions; and (3) ungulate populations that are currently migratory may begin to demonstrate interannual variability in whether they migrate, depending on environmental conditions and density-dependence, and may remain resident for sets of consecutive years. Through discussions with managers, physical barriers to movement such as roads and fences were identified as a core concern. In addition, the primary research needs of States are the acquisition and analysis of data on ungulate movements, to refine delineation of winter range, summer range, and corridors, and to support a better understanding of how ungulates use these habitats. When it comes to understanding climate effects, managers were more concerned with understanding the vulnerability of winter- and summer-range habitats than the vulnerability of migration corridors because of the influence of summer and winter forage on ungulate condition and reproductive success. Managers were also concerned about how forage quality and quantity might change because of stressors such as drought, wildfire, and invasive species and how they might need to alter habitat-treatment strategies as a result. More baseline data are needed before effective projections of ungulate migration, at a West-wide scale under climate change, can be made. These data needs include (1) more clearly defined corridors and seasonal range habitats; (2) a comprehensive understanding of the ecological drivers of migration across ungulate species and populations; and (3) the identification of environmental thresholds for key variables that influence migration, above which ungulates alter migratory behavior. The CASCs have several opportunities to play a role in addressing these needs. The CASCs could initiate projects to identify past and potential future changes and trends in key variables known to affect ungulate migration, such as plant phenology, forage quality, or winter severity. However, it would be difficult to use this information to determine what those trends mean for ungulate migration due to the lack of knowledge about environmental thresholds for ungulates. Additional projects would be required to compare multiple years of movement data with key variables to define thresholds. Once available, information on environmental thresholds could be integrated with projections of key variables to forecast the likelihood that the migration routes or the distance traveled could change—another area in which the CASCs could contribute. A more immediate role for the CASCs would be to carry out synthesis projects. One such project could summarize the “state of the science” on the drivers of ungulate migration. Although there are dozens of population- and location-specific studies on this topic, collating this information could help highlight trends in migration drivers that span species and geographies: a necessary first step toward determining the extent to which migration drivers could be affected by climate change. A second project could focus on what is known about how climate variability and change affect ungulate life-histories, population dynamics, and migration in the Western United States. The goal of this effort could be to identify knowledge clusters and information gaps that require further investigation. Together, these synthesized products could focus future scientific activities on the most pressing issues of ungulate migration and climate change in the Western United States.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New↗

USGS1997

Summary of information on aquatic biota and their habitats in the Willamette Basin, Oregon, through 1995

Available information on aquatic biota of the Willamette Basin was reviewed and summarized to describe current and historical conditions as part of the U.S. Geological Survey's National Water-Quality Assessment Program. Biological parameters emphasized include the status, distribution, and trends of aquatic biota, particularly algae, macroinvertebrates, and fish; the condition of aquatic and riparian habitat in which these biota reside; and the response of these biota to natural and human-associated impacts, including the level, type, and effect of contaminants. Considerable data are available on aquatic biota in the Willamette Basin, although the information is highly uneven relative to taxa and spatial scope. Extensive information exists for high-profile taxa, such as salmonid fishes, but less information is available for macroinvertebrates, and relatively little data exist for algae. Additionally, some areas such as the H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest and the main stem Willamette River have been extensively studied, whereas data are limited for many other areas. The basin supports a diverse aquatic macroinvertebrate fauna. Available data indicate a relatively high diversity of taxa and a high richness of Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera (EPT) taxa in the upper reaches of the basin. In the lower main stem reaches, macroinvertebrate assemblages are dominated by pollution tolerant organisms and those adapted to low dissolved oxygen levels. Most of the limited data on algae are from sampling in the main stem Willamette River. Diatoms and blue-green algae are the dominant algal forms. Approximately 61 fish species occur in the basin, although nearly half are introduced. Species richness and distribution are highly correlated with elevation, stream gradient, and water temperature. High elevation, cold water, mountain streams are characterized by a few species of salmonids, sculpins, suckers, and whitefish. Low elevation, main stem reaches of major rivers and streams are dominated by warm water species, such as bass, catfish, and several species in the pan fish group. The only species of fish listed as threatened or endangered is the Oregon chub (Oregonichthys crameri). The effect of an expanding human presence in the Willamette Basin has substantially altered aquatic and riparian habitats, and the biota that use or reside in these habitats. Construction of dams, channelization and bank stabilization of rivers, species introductions, supplementations of fisheries through aquaculture, timber harvesting, agricultural activities, and urbanization have contributed to changes in aquatic habitats and biota from historical conditions. Aquatic toxicological investigations in the basin have focused primarily on fish. These studies have addressed chlorinated pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), dioxins and furans, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and trace elements in aquatic tissue, as well as fish health assessments, skeletal abnormalities, and aquatic toxicological responses. Several pesticides exceeded U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and State water-quality criteria for the protection of aquatic life. Elevated PCB, dioxin, and furan concentrations were associated with point sources, such as pulp and paper mills. Elevated concentrations of mercury in aquatic tissue were associated with several reservoirs. Fish health assessments and skeletal abnormality studies detected high levels of abnormalities in fish from the main stem Willamette River. Few investigations have examined aquatic toxicological responses, such as enzyme induction assays, growth assays, and biomarker studies.

Oregon↗

USGS1999

The effects of global climate change on seagrasses

The increasing rate of global climate change seen in this century, and predicted to accelerate into the next, will significantly impact the Earth's oceans. In this review, we examine previously published seagrass research through a lens of global climate change in order to consider the potential effects on the world's seagrasses. A primary effect of increased global temperature on seagrasses will be the alteration of growth rates and other physiological functions of the plants themselves. The distribution of seagrasses will shift as a result of increased temperature stress and changes in the patterns of sexual reproduction. Indirect temperature effects may include plant community changes as a result of increased eutrophication and changes in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events. The direct effects of sea level rise on the coastal oceans will be to increase water depths, change tidal variation (both mean tide level and tidal prism), alter water movement, and increase seawater intrusion into estuaries and rivers. A major impact of all these changes on seagrasses and tidal freshwater plants will be a redistribution of existing habitats. The intrusion of ocean water into formerly fresh or brackish water areas will directly affect estuarine plant distribution by changing conditions at specific locations, causing some plants to relocate in order to stay within their tolerance zones and allowing others to expand their distribution inland. Distribution changes will result from the effects of salinity change on seed germination, propagule formation, photosynthesis, growth and biomass. Also, some plant communities may decline or be eliminated as a result of increased disease activity under more highly saline conditions. Increased water depth, which reduces the amount of light reaching existing seagrass beds, will directly reduce plant productivity where plants are light limited. Likewise, increases in water motion and tidal circulation will decrease the amount of light reaching the plants by increasing turbidity or by stimulating the growth of epiphytes. Increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide will directly elevate the amount of CO 2 in coastal waters. In areas where seagrasses are carbon limited, this may increase primary production, although whether this increase will be sustained with long-term CO 2 enrichment is uncertain. The impact of increases in CO 2 will vary with species and environmental circumstances, but will likely include species distribution by altering the competition between seagrass species as well as between seagrass and algal populations. The reaction of seagrasses to UV-B radiation may range from inhibition of photosynthetic activity, as seen for terrestrial plants and marine algae, to the increased metabolic cost of producing UV-B blocking compounds within plant tissue. The effects of UV-B radiation will likely be greatest in the tropics and in southern oceans. There is every reason to believe that, as with the predicted terrestrial effects of global climate change, impacts to seagrasses will be great. The changes that will occur in seagrass communities are difficult to predict; our assessment clearly points out the need for research directed toward the impact of global climate change on seagrasses.

Aquatic Botany↗

USGS2021

Assessing the uncertainties in climatic estimates based on vegetation assemblages: Examples from modern vegetation assemblages in the American Southwest

Assemblages of fossil plant remains have been widely used to reconstruct past climatic conditions, usually through the application of methods that involve either finding vegetation analogues on the modern landscape (and using the modern associated climatic values as the basis for an estimate) or using the modern climatic ranges of individual taxa in an assemblage to determine the range of a given climate variable that would allow these plant taxa to live together. Although these approaches are relatively straightforward, it is difficult to assess the uncertainties associated with each approach, particularly in regard to their application to plant macrofossil assemblages. To explore the uncertainty that may arise from inaccuracy and imprecision in climate reconstructions and from ecological considerations we used variants of both approaches to estimate climate from two data sets of modern vegetation assemblages from the southwestern United States: (1) 1752 gridded “virtual plant assemblages” based on plant range maps that provide uniform spatial coverage of the presence or absence of major woody plant taxa across the study area; and (2) 43 modern packrat ( Neotoma spp.) midden presence-absence assemblages that are similar to fossil midden assemblages. By comparing observed and estimated climate values, we evaluated the quality of the climate estimates, identified sources of uncertainty, and characterized the nature and magnitude of the effects of these uncertainties on the climate estimates. Uncertainties in estimating climate from vegetation assemblages arise because any given plant taxon (or assemblage) must have the resiliency to survive a range of climatic variability, and because of the strong intercorrelations among climatic variables in the modern climate data. Additional sources of uncertainty in climate estimates from plant assemblages include: (1) the modern climate and plant distribution data that are selected as the basis for estimation; (2) the particular quantitative approach that is used to estimate climate; (3) the sufficiency of the number of taxa in the analysis for providing an unbiased representation of the vegetation community as it existed for each time period in the analysis; and, (4) the location of the assemblage on the climatic and environmental gradients in the calibration data set for each climate variable under consideration. We conclude that vegetation assemblages can provide valid and reproducible estimates of climatic variables and that the primary trends and mapped patterns in the observed climate data can be reconstructed from such estimates. However, many factors may affect the quality of an estimate from a given plant assemblage, including aspects of data selection, data adequacy, methodologies, and the location of the assemblage site relative to gradients in the base climate data. It is particularly difficult to accurately estimate extreme values in the observed climate data, because estimated values from either end of an observed climate gradient necessarily “move toward the middle” of the gradient. In addition, the interval chosen to represent modern climate (here we used 1961 to 1990) may have a large impact on the size of the estimated difference between modern and past climate at a given site.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico,↗

USGS2016

Hydrologic analyses in support of the Navajo Generating Station–Kayenta Mine Complex environmental impact statement

Introduction The U.S. Department of Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation, Lower Colorado Region (Reclamation) is preparing an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the Navajo Generating Station-Kayenta Mine Complex Project (NGS-KMC Project). The proposed project involves various Federal approvals that would facilitate continued operation of the Navajo Generating Station (NGS) from December 23, 2019 through 2044, and continued operation of the Kayenta Mine and support facilities (collectively called the Kayenta Mine Complex, or KMC) to supply coal to the NGS for this operational period. The EIS will consider several project alternatives that are likely to produce different effects on the Navajo (N) aquifer; the N aquifer is the principal water resource in the Black Mesa area used by the Navajo Nation, Hopi Tribe, and Peabody Western Coal Company (PWCC). The N aquifer is composed of three hydraulically connected formations—the Navajo Sandstone, the Kayenta Formation, and the Lukachukai Member of the Wingate Sandstone—that function as a single aquifer. The N aquifer is confined under most of Black Mesa, and the overlying stratigraphy limits recharge to this part of the aquifer. The N aquifer is unconfined in areas surrounding Black Mesa, and most recharge occurs where the Navajo Sandstone is exposed in the area near Shonto, Arizona. Overlying the N aquifer is the D aquifer, which includes the Dakota Sandstone, Morrison Formation, Entrada Sandstone, and Carmel Formation. The aquifer is named for the Dakota Sandstone, which is the primary water-bearing unit. The NGS is located near Page, Arizona on the Navajo Nation. The KMC, which delivers coal to NGS by way of a dedicated electric railroad, is located approximately 83 miles southeast of NGS (about 125 miles northeast of Flagstaff, Arizona). The Kayenta Mine permit area is located on about 44,073 acres of land leased within the boundaries of the Hopi and Navajo Indian Reservations. KMC has been conducting mining and reclamation operations within the Kayenta Mine permit boundary since 1973. The KMC part of the proposed project requires approval by the Office of Surface Mining (OSM) of a significant revision of the mine’s permit to operate in accordance with the Surface Mine Control and Reclamation Act (Public Law 95-87, 91 Stat. 445 [30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq. ]) . The revision will identify coal resource areas that may be used to continue extracting coal at the present rate of approximately 8.2 million tons per year. The Kayenta Mine Complex uses water pumped from the D and N aquifers beneath PWCC’s leasehold to support mining and reclamation activities. Prior to 2006, water from the PWCC well field also was used to transport coal by way of a coal-slurry pipeline to the now-closed Mohave Generating Station. Water usage at the leasehold was approximately 4,100 acre-feet per year (acre-ft/yr) during the period the pipeline was in use, and declined to an average 1,255 acre-ft/yr from 2006 to 2011. The Probable Hydrologic Consequences (PHC) section of the mining and reclamation permit must be modified to project the consequences of extended water use by the mine for the duration of the KMC part of the project, including a post-mining reclamation period. Since 1971, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has conducted the Black Mesa Monitoring Program, which consists of monitoring water levels and water quality in the N aquifer, compiling information on water use by PWCC and tribal communities, maintaining several stream-gaging stations, measuring discharge at selected springs, conducting special studies, and reporting findings. These data are useful in evaluating the effects on the N aquifer from PWCC and community pumping, and the effects of variable precipitation. The EIS will assess the impacts of continued pumping on the N aquifer, including changes in storage, water quality, and effects on spring and baseflow discharge, by proposed mining through 2044, and during the reclamation process to 2057. Several groundwater models exist for the area and Reclamation concluded it would conduct a peer review of the groundwater flow model that will be used to assess the direct, reasonably foreseeable indirect, and cumulative effects of future groundwater withdrawals on the D and N aquifers in the Black Mesa area. Reclamation made this determination because of the level of controversy around the effects of continued water use and the comments received from the 2014 draft EIS scoping meetings. Reclamation requested assistance from the USGS in evaluating existing groundwater flow models of the Black Mesa Basin that can be used to predict the effects of different project alternatives on the D and N aquifers.

Arizona↗

USGS2009

Prevention, early detection and containment of invasive, nonnative plants in the Hawaiian Islands: current efforts and needs

Introduction: Invasive, non-native plants (or environmental weeds) have long been recognized as a major threat to the native biodiversity of oceanic islands (Cronk & Fuller, 1995; Denslow, 2003). Globally, several hundred non-native plant species have been reported to have major impacts on natural areas on oceanic islands (Kueffer et al ., 2009). In Hawaii, at least some 50 non-native plant species reach dominance in natural areas (Kueffer et al ., 2009) and many of them are known to impact ecosystem processes or biodiversity. One example is the invasive Australian tree fern ( Cyathea cooperi ), which has been shown to be very efficient at utilizing soil nitrogen and can grow six times as rapidly in height, maintain four times more fronds, and produce significantly more fertile fronds per month than the native Hawaiian endemic tree ferns, Cibotium spp. (Durand & Goldstein, 2001a, b). Additionally, while native tree ferns provide an ideal substrate for epiphytic growth of many understory ferns and flowering plants, the Australian tree fern has the effect of impoverishing the understory and failing to support an abundance of native epiphytes (Medeiros & Loope, 1993). Other notorious examples of invasive plant species problematic for biodiversity and ecosystem processes in Hawaii include miconia ( Miconia calvescens ), strawberry guava ( Psidium cattleianum ), albizia ( Falcataria moluccana ), firetree ( Morella faya ), clidemia ( Clidemia hirta ), kahili ginger ( Hedychium gardnerianum ), and fountain grass ( Pennisetum setaceum ), to name just a few. Fireweed ( Senecio madagascariensis ) is a recent example of a seriously problematic invasive species for Hawaii’s agriculture and is damaging certain high-elevations native ecosystems as well. The threat of invasive plants has long been recognized in Hawaii and is well documented (e.g. Cox, 1999; Loope & Kraus, 2009 in press; Loope et al ., 2004; Mooney & Drake, 1986; Stone & Scott, 1985; Stone et al. , 1992). In many respects, Hawaii may be near the forefront among national and international efforts to address the burgeoning threat of invasive plants, perhaps especially in the field of outreach and education (Holt, 1996; Van Driesche & Van Driesche, 2000). However, given the scale of the problem many challenges still need to be addressed and gaps in the existing management system need to be identified. In particular, it appears that new non-native plant species are still introduced to the Hawaiian Islands at a high rate with little or no regard for their potential invasiveness. In fact, a Pacific-wide and a global survey of non-native plants on oceanic islands have both shown that on Hawaii among all archipelagos by far the highest number of problematic invasive species known from other areas in the world is already present (Denslow et al . 2009, Kueffer et al . 2009). Hawaii lacks an effective mechanism for tracking what species are present or incoming. For instance, early detection nursery surveys conducted on Maui in 2008 found over 300 species of cultivated vascular plants that have not previously been recorded in Hawaii (Starr et al. , in prep.). In spite of an innovative Hawaii Biological Survey (e.g. Eldredge & Evenhuis, 2003), there is no mechanism for recording presence of a species until it becomes naturalized. Some of these new introductions may quickly become serious pests. Fireweed, first recorded in Hawaii on the Big Island in the early 1980s, is now considered one of the Kueffer & Loope 2009 5/48 worst weeds of pastures and is also invading natural areas from near sea level to above 10,000 feet. Although the cultivated and as yet non-invasive Cortaderia selloana has been present in Hawaii for 50 years or more, the morphologically similar Cortaderia jubata was simultaneously found to be present on Maui and invading on a large scale in 1989. It played an important role in inspiring the establishment of the Maui Invasive Species Committee (MISC) in 1997, and MISC now spends roughly $200,000 per year removing and containing C. jubata to keep it from becoming widespread in high elevation conservation lands of East and West Maui. The existence of many similar examples shows that to date regulatory action to prevent new invasive plant species from establishing and spreading in Hawaii has not yet been as successful as it needs to be. In particular, because some problematic invasive species known from other areas in the world (Kueffer et al ., 2009; Weber, 2003) have not yet been recorded from Hawaii, preventive measures against the introduction and spread of such likely invasive species is therefore an urgent need for Hawaii. Indeed, regulation of importation and early detection and eradication of introduced species before they become abundant and widespread are widely considered the most cost-efficient and often only effective measures against the threat of new invasive species (Kueffer & Hirsch Hadorn, 2008; Wittenberg & Cock, 2001). Timing seems favorable for Hawaii to achieve effective protection against the threat of new invasive species through prevention, early detection, and eradication/containment. Through the establishment and evolution of Invasive Species Committees (ISCs) on each major Hawaiian island, the institutional capacity has been built up for prevention, early detection, containment, and outreach at an island scale. Weed risk assessment (Daehler et al ., 2004) and early detection methodologies (Starr et al. , in review-a, b) have been developed and tested specifically for Hawaii. Containment strategies have been successful (e.g., Special Ecological Areas in Hawaii Volcanoes National Park), and so have eradications of particular species on an island scale (e.g. mullein ( Verbascum thapsus ) and other species on Maui, fireweed ( Senecio madagascariensis ) on Kauai). These successful management strategies may be further strengthened through recently developed novel approaches in research (e.g. remote sensing, species distribution modelling, and molecular genetics tools). Another major recent achievement is the gained support of the plant industry for preventive measures against invasive species (see p. 13ff). Last but not least, regulatory action is also moving forward. Passage of House Bill 2517 by the 2008 Hawaii House and Senate and prompt signing of the bill into law by the Governor provides hope that action to ban the sale of a meaningful suite of restricted weeds can quickly proceed through the rulemaking phase into the implementation phase. This report documents these achievements and experiences and provides a range of perspectives on how to further develop prevention, early detection and containment of invasive species in Hawaii. The report is based on a symposium and workshop held at the 2008 Hawaii Conservation Conference in Honolulu on 31 July 2008.

Hawaii↗

USGS2012

USGS Environmental health science strategy: providing environmental health science for a changing world: Public review release

America has an abundance of natural resources. We have bountiful clean water, fertile soil, and unrivaled national parks, wildlife refuges, and public lands. These resources enrich our lives and preserve our health and wellbeing. These resources have been maintained because of our history of respect for their value and an enduring commitment to their vigilant protection. Awareness of the social, economic, and personal value of the health of our environment is increasing. The emergence of environmentally driven diseases caused by environmental exposure to contaminants and pathogens is a growing concern worldwide. New health threats and patterns of established threats are affected by both natural and anthropogenic changes to the environment. Human activities are key drivers of emerging (new and re-emerging) health threats. Societal demands for land and natural resources, a better quality of life, improved economic prosperity, and the environmental impacts associated with these demands will continue to increase. Natural earth processes, climate trends, and related climatic events will add to the environmental impact of human activities. These environmental drivers will influence exposure to disease agents, including viral, bacterial, prion, and fungal pathogens, parasites, natural earth materials, toxins and other biogenic compounds, and synthetic chemicals and substances. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) defines environmental health science broadly as the interdisciplinary study of relations among the quality of the physical environment, the health of the living environment, and human health. The interactions among these three spheres are driven by human activities, ecological processes, and natural earth processes; the interactions affect exposure to contaminants and pathogens and the severity of environmentally driven diseases in animals and people. This definition provides USGS with a framework for synthesizing natural science information from across the Bureau and providing it to environmental, natural resource, agricultural, and public-health managers. The USGS is a Federal science agency with a broad range of natural science expertise relevant to environmental health. USGS provides scientific information and tools as a scientific basis for management and policy decision making. USGS specializes in science at the environment-health interface, by characterizing the processes that affect the interaction among the physical environment, the living environment, and people, and the resulting factors that affect ecological and human exposure to disease agents. This report describes a 10-year strategy that encompasses the portfolio of USGS environmental health science. It summarizes national environmental health priorities that USGS is best suited to address, and will serve as a strategic framework for USGS environmental health science goals, actions, and outcomes for the next decade. Implementation of this strategy is intended to aid coordination of USGS environmental health activities and to provide a focal point for disseminating information to stakeholders. The "One Health" paradigm advocated by the World Health Organization (WHO, 2011), and the American Veterinary Medicine Association (AVMA, 2008), among others, is based on a general recognition that the health of humans, animals, and the environment are inextricably linked. Thus, successful efforts to protect that health will require increased interdisciplinary research and increased communication and collaboration among the broader scientific and health community. This strategy is built upon that paradigm. The vision, mission, and five cornerstone goals of the USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy were developed with significant input from a wide range of stakeholders. Vision - The USGS is a premier source of the environmental health science needed to safeguard the health of the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. Mission - The mission of USGS in environmental health science is to contribute scientific information to environmental, natural resource, agricultural, and public-health managers, who use that science to support sound decision making. USGS provides the science to: - Goal 1: Identify, prioritize, and detect contaminants and pathogens of emerging environmental concern. - Goal 2: Reduce the impact of contaminants on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Goal 3: Reduce the impact of pathogens on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Goal 4: Discover the complex interactions and combined effects of exposure to contaminants and pathogens. - Goal 5: Prepare for and respond to environmental impacts and related health threats of natural and anthropogenic disasters. Goals 1 through 4 are intended to provide science to address environmental health threats in a logical order, from informing prevention and preparedness, to supporting systematic management response to environmental health issues. Goal 4 addresses the interaction among contaminants and pathogens, an issue of emerging concern in environmental health science. Goal 5 acknowledges the fact that natural and anthropogenic disasters can cause immediate and prolonged adverse environmental health threats. This strategy proposes that USGS take the following strategic science actions to achieve each of the five goals of this strategy: Goal 1: Identify, prioritize, and detect contaminants and pathogens of emerging environmental concern. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Prioritize contaminants and pathogens of emerging concern to guide research, detection, and management activities. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Conduct surveillance and monitoring to provide early warning of emerging health threats. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Develop approaches and tools that identify vulnerable environmental settings, ecosystems, and species. Goal 2: Reduce the impact of contaminants on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Systematically characterize the sources, occurrence, transport and fate of environmental contaminants to guide efforts to manage and mitigate contamination. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Evaluate the threats of contamination on the health of the environment, fish, wildlife, and people, and inform the associated management and protection efforts. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Characterize potential human exposure to support establishment of health-based standards or guidelines and contamination-reduction efforts. Goal 3: Reduce the impact of pathogens on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Determine the biotic and abiotic factors that control the ecology of infectious diseases affecting natural populations of aquatic and terrestrial species and potential transmission to other animals and humans. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Establish how natural and anthropogenic environmental changes affect the distribution and severity of infectious diseases in natural populations of aquatic and terrestrial species and potential transmission to other animals and humans. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Develop surveillance systems to identify changing patterns of disease activity in priority geographic areas. Goal 4: Discover the complex interactions and combined effects of exposure to contaminants and pathogens. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Identify how exposure to one class of disease agents (contaminants or pathogens) can make an organism more susceptible to effects from exposure to the other class of disease agents. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Implement interdisciplinary studies that characterize the effects of combined exposure to pathogens and contaminants. Goal 5: Prepare for and respond to the environmental impacts and related health threats of natural and anthropogenic disasters. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Establish a formal interdisciplinary science capability to rapidly assess the environmental health risks associated with disasters. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Enhance methods to anticipate, prepare for, and identify environmental, ecological, and related health impacts of future disasters. This strategy is one of seven USGS science strategies developed concurrently: - Climate and Land Use Change - Core Science Systems - Ecosystems - Energy and Mineral Resources - Environmental Health - Natural Hazards - Water. This strategy describes how USGS will address the highest priority environmental health issues facing the Nation. The ultimate intended outcome of this science strategy is prevention and reduction of adverse impacts to the quality of the environment, the health of our living resources, and human health. Communication with, and receiving input from, partners and stakeholders regarding their science needs is essential for successful implementation of this strategy. It is incumbent on USGS to reach out to all stakeholders to ensure that USGS efforts are focused on the highest priority environmental health issues and that products are provided in the most timely and usable form to all those who can use them. USGS must reach out to the scientific community, internally and externally, to ensure that our efforts are integrated with and take full advantage of the activities of others.

Open-File Report↗