Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Issues in Ecology”

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 127 records · Page 7Linked to original sources
USGS1998

The US federal framework for research on endocrine disrupters and an analysis of research programs supported during fiscal year 1996

The potential health and ecological effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals has become a high visibility environmental issue. The 1990s have witnessed a growing concern, both on the part of the scientific community and the public, that environmental chemicals may be causing widespread effects in humans and in a variety of fish and wildlife species. This growing concern led the Committee on the Environment and Natural Resources (CENR) of the National Science and Technology Council to identify the endocrine disruptor issue as a major research initiative in early 1995 and subsequently establish an ad hoc Working Group on Endocrine Disruptors. The objectives of the working group are to 1) develop a planning framework for federal research related to human and ecological health effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals; 2) conduct an inventory of ongoing federal research programs; and 3) identify research gaps and develop a coordinated interagency plan to address priority research needs. This communication summarizes the activities of the federal government in defining a common framework for planning an endocrine disruptor research program and in assessing the status of the current effort. After developing the research framework and compiling an inventory of active research projects supported by the federal government in fiscal year 1996, the CENR working group evaluated the current federal effort by comparing the ongoing activities with the research needs identified in the framework. The analysis showed that the federal government supports considerable research on human health effects, ecological effects, and exposure assessment, with a predominance of activity occurring under human health effects. The analysis also indicates that studies on reproductive development and carcinogenesis are more prevalent than studies on neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity, that mammals (mostly laboratory animals) are the main species under study, and that chlorinated dibenzodioxins and polychlorinated biphenyls are the most commonly studied chemical classes. Comparison of the inventory with the research needs should allow identification of underrepresented research areas in need of attention.

Environmental Health Perspectives↗
USGS2021

Editorial: Combining the science and practice of restoration ecology-Case studies of a grassroots binational restoration collaborative in the Madrean Archipelago Ecoregion (2014- 2019)

The Sky Island Restoration Collaborative (SIRC) is a growing partnership between government agencies, nonprofit organizations, and private landowners in southeast Arizona, the United States, and northern Sonora, Mexico. Starting in 2014 as an experiment to cultivate restoration efforts by connecting people across vocations and nations, SIRC has evolved over 5 years into a flourishing landscape-restoration initiative. The group is founded on the concept of developing a restoration economy, where ecological and socioeconomic benefits are interconnected and complimentary. The variety of ideas, people, field sites, administration, and organizations promote learning and increase project success through iterative adaptive management, transparency, and sharing. The collaborative seeks to make restoration self-sustaining and improve quality of life for citizens living along the US-Mexico border. Research and experiments are developed between scientists and practitioners to test hypotheses, qualify procedures, and quantify impacts on shared projects. Simultaneously, partners encourage and facilitate connecting more people to the landscape—via volunteerism, internships, training, and mentoring. Through this history, SIRC’s evolution is pioneering the integration of community and ecological restoration to protect biodiversity in the Madrean Archipelago Ecoregion. This editorial introduces SIRC as a unique opportunity for scientists and practitioners looking to engage in binational partnerships and segues into this special journal issue we have assembled that relates new findings in the field of restoration ecology.

Arizona, New Mexico↗
USGS2001

Role of environmental variability in evaluating stressor effects

In this chapter, we discuss how environmental variability affects the exposure of organisms and ecological systems to stressors, and give guidance on how to understand influences of stressors. We consider the characteristics of environmental variability and issues relating to the measurement of environmental variation. We discuss how to select the optimal indicators of ecological response in a variable natural environment. Finally, we suggest some approaches to incorporate environmental variability into resource management. In all cases we employ examples and case studies throughout to illustrate principles.

Book chapter↗
USGS1989

Acid rain publications by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1979-1989

Pollution of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems has been a concern to society since the burning of fossil fuels began in the industrial revolution. In the past decade or so, this concern has been heightened by evidence that chemical transformation in the atmosphere of combustion by-products and subsequent long-range transport can cause environmental damage in remote areas. The extent of this damage and the rates of ecological recovery were largely unknown. "Acid rain" became the environmental issue of the 1980's. To address the increasing concerns of the public, in 1980 the Federal government initiated a 10-year interagency research program to develop information that could be used by the President and the Congress in making decisions for emission controls. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been an active participant in acid precipitation research. The Service provided support to a number of scientific conferences and forums, including the Action Seminar on Acid Precipitation held in Toronto, Canada, in 1979, an international symposium on Acidic Precipitation and Fishery Impacts in Northeastern North America in 1981, and a symposium on Acidic Precipitation and Atmospheric Deposition: A Western Perspective in 1982. These meetings as well as the growing involvement with the government's National Acidic Precipitation Assessment Program placed the Service in the lead in research on the biological effects of acidic deposition. Research projects have encompassed water chemistry, aquatic invertebrates, amphibians, fish, and waterfowl. Water quality surveys have been conducted to help determine the extent of acid precipitation effects in the northeast, Middle Atlantic, and Rocky Mountain regions. In addition to lake and stream studies, research in wetland and some terrestrial habitats has also been conducted. Specific projects have addressed important sport species such as brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis), Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar), and striped bass (Morone saxatilis). Trace metal accumulation in fish has been investigated and a symposium sponsored on related work. U.S> Fish and Wildlife Service scientists serve as advisors and participants in research being conducted by industry, nonprofit groups, State and other Federal agencies. Researcher have worked closely with colleagues in Canada, England, Norway, Scotland, the Soviet Union, and Sweden to gain additional understanding of the problem. In 1982, the Service implemented a mitigation research program to provide resource managers with information to help them protect sensitive ecosystems, and rehabilitation methods for resources already affected by acidification. An international workshop was convened to outline the research needs. Several conferences were organized to develop appropriate field and laboratory procedures. Scientists with the mitigation research program are evaluating the ecological effects of liming (addition of base material) surface waters and surrounding watershed to provide buffering against acidic inputs. Through long-term cooperative project with States and other organizations, investigations are studying possible abatement methods for regions most affected by acidic deposition. To date, more than 200 reports the describe these studies have been published. These products include conference proceedings, journal articles, and in-house scientific publications. An education poster describing the effects of acid rain on aquatic ecosystems was developed and distributed to individuals, conservations and State organizations, and the public education system. This annotated bibliography lists current publications by Service authors, cooperators, or contractors on acid rain and related quality. Entire are arranged alphabetically by author surname. For further information about the research program, contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Acid Precipitation Section, National Fishery Research Center -- Leetown, Box 700, Kearneysville, WV 25430.

Biological Report↗
USGS2013

Does seeding after wildfires in rangelands reduce erosion or invasive species?

Mitigation of ecological damage caused by rangeland wildfires has historically been an issue restricted to the western United States. It has focused on conservation of ecosystem function through reducing soil erosion and spread of invasive plants. Effectiveness of mitigation treatments has been debated recently. We reviewed recent literature to conduct a meta-analysis of seeding after wildfires to determine if seedings may (1) protect ecosystems against soil erosion and (2) reduce invasion or abundance of undesirable nonnative plant species. Effectiveness of postfire seedings was examined in 8 erosion and 19 invasive species cases. Seeding has little effect on erosion during the first year after fire and is highly dependent upon initial establishment and coverage of species in successive years. Among all seeding cases, 28% reduced, 67% were neutral, and 5% increased invasive species abundance. Older seedings were more likely to show reductions in invasives than younger seedings. Seedings with high plant establishment were more likely to reduce invasives than those with low establishment. Studies are needed that examine (1) frequency of adequate establishment of postfire seedings and causal factors of success or failure, (2) long-term impacts of seeding along a range of initial establishment and concomitant plant coverage over time as it relates to erosion and abundance of invasive plant species, and (3) auxiliary treatments designed to increase likelihood of germination and establishment given the inevitable variability of environmental conditions. These studies would aid land managers in deciding when postfire treatments are required and their likely level of success.

Restoration Ecology↗
USGS2015

Taking a systems approach to ecological systems

Increasingly, there is interest in a systems-level understanding of ecological problems, which requires the evaluation of more complex, causal hypotheses. In this issue of the Journal of Vegetation Science, Soliveres et al. use structural equation modeling to test a causal network hypothesis about how tree canopies affect understorey communities. Historical analysis suggests structural equation modeling has been under-utilized in ecology.

Journal of Vegetation Science↗
USGS1996

Zebra mussel infestation of unionid bivalves (Unionidae) in North America

In 1989, zebra mussels received national attention in North America when they reached densities exceeding 750,000/m2 in a water withdrawal facility along the shore of western Lake Erie of the Laurentian Great Lakes. Although water withdrawal problems caused by zebra mussels have been of immediate concern, ecological impacts attributed to mussels are likely to be the more important long-term issue for surface waters in North America. To date, the epizoic colonization (i.e., infestation) of unionid bivalve mollusks by zebra mussels has caused the most direct and severe ecological impact. Infestation of and resulting impacts caused by zebra mussels on unionids in the Great Lakes began in 1988. By 1990, mortality of unionids was occurring at some locations; by 1991, extant populations of unionids in western Lake Erie were nearly extirpated; by 1992, unionid populations in the southern half of Lake St. Clair were extirpated; by 1993, unionids in widely separated geographic areas of the Great Lakes and the Mississippi River showed high mortality due to mussel infestation. All infested unionid species in the Great Lakes (23) have become infested and exhibited mortality within two to four years after heavy infestation began. Data indicate that mean zebra mussel densities >5,000–6,000/m 2 and infestation intensities >100-200/unionid in the presence of heavy zebra mussel recruitment results in near total mortality of unionids. At present, all unionid species in rivers, streams, and akes that sympatrically occur with zebra mussels have been infested and, in many locations, negatively impacted by zebra mussels. We do not know the potential consequences of infestation on the 297 unionid species found in North America, but believe zebra mussels pose an immediate threat to the abundance and diversity of unionids.

American Zoologist↗
USGS2014

Modelling non-Euclidean movement and landscape connectivity in highly structured ecological networks

Movement is influenced by landscape structure, configuration and geometry, but measuring distance as perceived by animals poses technical and logistical challenges. Instead, movement is typically measured using Euclidean distance, irrespective of location or landscape structure, or is based on arbitrary cost surfaces. A recently proposed extension of spatial capture-recapture (SCR) models resolves this issue using spatial encounter histories of individuals to calculate least-cost paths (ecological distance: Ecology , 94 , 2013, 287) thereby relaxing the Euclidean assumption. We evaluate the consequences of not accounting for movement heterogeneity when estimating abundance in highly structured landscapes, and demonstrate the value of this approach for estimating biologically realistic space-use patterns and landscape connectivity. We simulated SCR data in a riparian habitat network, using the ecological distance model under a range of scenarios where space-use in and around the landscape was increasingly associated with water (i.e. increasingly less Euclidean). To assess the influence of miscalculating distance on estimates of population size, we compared the results from the ecological and Euclidean distance based models. We then demonstrate that the ecological distance model can be used to estimate home range geometry when space use is not symmetrical. Finally, we provide a method for calculating landscape connectivity based on modelled species-landscape interactions generated from capture-recapture data. Using ecological distance always produced unbiased estimates of abundance. Explicitly modelling the strength of the species-landscape interaction provided a direct measure of landscape connectivity and better characterised true home range geometry. Abundance under the Euclidean distance model was increasingly (negatively) biased as space use was more strongly associated with water and, because home ranges are assumed to be symmetrical, produced poor characterisations of home range geometry and no information about landscape connectivity. The ecological distance SCR model uses spatially indexed capture-recapture data to estimate how activity patterns are influenced by landscape structure. As well as reducing bias in estimates of abundance, this approach provides biologically realistic representations of home range geometry, and direct information about species-landscape interactions. The incorporation of both structural (landscape) and functional (movement) components of connectivity provides a direct measure of species-specific landscape connectivity.

Methods in Ecology and Evolution↗
USGS2003

A Framework for Long-term Ecological Monitoring in Olympic National Park: Prototype for the Coniferous Forest Biome

This report is the result of a five-year collaboration between scientists of the U.S. Geological Survey Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center, Olympic Field Station, and the natural resources staff of Olympic National Park to develop a comprehensive strategy for monitoring natural resources of Olympic National Park. Olympic National Park is the National Park Serviceʼs prototype monitoring park, representing parks in the coniferous forest biome. Under the umbrella of the National Park Serviceʼs prototype parks program, U.S. Geological Survey and Olympic National Park staffs are obligated to: develop strategies and designs for monitoring the long-term health and integrity of national park ecosystems with a significant coniferous forest component. design exportable monitoring protocols that can be used by other parks within the coniferous forest biome (i.e., parks having similar environments), and create a demonstration area and ʻcenter of excellenceʼ for assisting other parks in developing ecological monitoring programs. Olympic National Park is part of the North Coast and Cascades Network, a network of seven Pacific Northwestern park units created recently by the National Park Serviceʼs Inventory and Monitoring Program to extend the monitoring of ʻvital signsʼ of park health to all National Park Service units. It is our intent and hope that the monitoring strategies and conceptual models described here will meet the overall purpose of the prototype parks monitoring program in proving useful not only to Olympic National Park, but also to parks within the North Coast and Cascades Network and elsewhere. Part I contains the conceptual design and sampling framework for the prototype long-term monitoring program in Olympic National Park. In this section, we explore key elements of monitoring design that help to ensure the spatial, ecological, and temporal integration of monitoring program elements and discuss approaches used to design an ecosystem-based monitoring program. Basic monitoring components include ecosystem drivers, (e.g., climate, atmospheric inputs, human pressures), indicators of ecosystem integrity (e.g., biogeochemical indicators), known threats (e.g., impacts of introduced mountain goats), and focal or ʻkeyʼ species (e.g., rare or listed species, Roosevelt elk). Monitoring system drivers and key indicators of ecosystem integrity provide the long-term baseline needed to judge what constitutes ʻunnaturalʼ variation in park resources and provide the earliest possible warning of unacceptable change. Monitoring effects of known threats and the status of focal species will provide information useful to park managers for dealing with current park issues. In Part I we describe the process of identifying potential indicators of ecological condition and present conceptual models of park ecosystems. In addition we report results from several workshops held in conjunction with Olympic National Park aimed at identifying potential indicators of change in the parkʼs ecosystem. First, we describe the responses of Olympic National Park staff to the generic question, “What is the most important resource to monitor in Olympic National Park and why?” followed by the responses from resource and land managers from areas adjoining the park. We also catalogue the responses of various expert groups that we asked to help identify the most appropriate system drivers and indicators of change in the Olympic National Park ecosystems. Results of the workshops provided the justification for selecting basic indicators of ecosystem integrity, effects of current threats to park resources, and focal resources of parks to detect both the currently evident and unforeseeable changes in park resources. We conclude Part I by exploring several generic statistical issues relevant to monitoring natural resources in Olympic National Park. Specifically we discuss trade-offs associated with sampling extensively versus sampling intensively in smaller geographic regions and describe a conceptual framework to guide development of a generic sampling frame for monitoring. We recommend partitioning Olympic National Park into three zones of decreasing accessibility to maximize monitoring efficiency. We present examples of how the generic sampling frame could be used to help ensure spatial integration of individual monitoring projects. Part II of the report is a record of the potential monitoring questions and indicators identified to date in our workshops. The presentation is organized according to the major system drivers, components, and processes identified in the intermediate-level working model of the Olympic National Park ecosystem. For each component of the park system, we develop the need and justification for monitoring, articulate park management issues, and describe key resources and ecosystem functions. We also present a pictorial conceptual model of each ecological subsystem, identify monitoring questions, and list potential indicators for each monitoring question. We conclude each section by identifying linkages of indicators to other ecological subsystems in our general ecosystem model, spatial and temporal contexts for monitoring (where and how often to monitor), and research and development needs. Part II represents the most current detailed listing of potential indicators—the material for subsequent discussions of monitoring priorities and selection of indicators for protocol development. Collectively, the sections of this report contain a comprehensive list of the important monitoring questions and potential indicators as well as recommendations for designing an integrated monitoring program. In Part I, Chapter 6 we provide recommendations on how to proceed with the important next steps in the design process: establishing priorities among the many possible monitoring questions and indicators, and beginning to research and design effective long-term monitoring protocols.

Information and Technology Report↗
USGS2024

Ecology of Lake Erie - Chemistry, plankton & planktivory: A synthesis

As with other large lake ecosystems worldwide, Lake Erie can be considered a moving target for management, owing to physicochemical and biological changes brought on by anthropogenic change, both planned (e.g. nutrient and fisheries management) and unplanned (e.g. climate change, invasive species, modified land-use activities). These changes have challenged efforts to conserve biodiversity, sustain exploitable resources, and maintain the integrity of services valued by society both within the Lake Erie basin and (Fraker et al., 2022; Fussell et al., 2016; Sinclair et al., 2021; Sinclair et al., 2023) and outside of it (Allan et al., 2013; Jenny et al., 2020; Sterner et al., 2017). Some of these changes and their ramifications for management were documented in the first of four AEHM special issues devoted to the Lake Erie ecosystem (the fourth issue of 2023, volume 26, issue 4; see overview by Ludsin et al., 2023). That special issue focused explicitly on nutrient inputs and availability in Lake Erie and the lower food web, including planktonic and benthic microbial (including cyanobacteria), algal, and invasive dreissenid mussel communities. Similar to the previous Lake Erie special issue, this second one has focused on documenting the state of the lake, providing ecological understanding that could potentially benefit management. While some overlap in topics exists between issues, the studies conducted herein were completely independent of those previous investigations and offer unique insights. Specifically, the contributions to this current issue center on: 1) dynamics of water chemistry in Lake Erie’s central basin (i.e. bottom hypoxia; Ackerman et al., 2024) and western basin (i.e. mercury; Starr et al., 2024); 2) changes in primary producer biomass (Lesht et al., 2024), cyanotoxins (i.e. microcystin; Zastepa et al., 2024), and water quality (e.g. water clarity and dissolved nutrients; Howell et al., 2024); and 3) larval fish foraging (i.e. Lake Whitefish; Coregonus clupeaformis; Amidon et al., 2024) and community structure and phenology (DeBruyne et al., 2024). Below we summarize the major findings of these papers and offer a synthetic perspective on the value of this research for understanding the state of Lake Erie and enhancing management.

Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management↗
USGS2017

Disturbance hydrology: Preparing for an increasingly disturbed future

This special issue is the result of several fruitful conference sessions on disturbance hydrology, which started at the 2013 AGU Fall Meeting in San Francisco and have continued every year since. The stimulating presentations and discussions surrounding those sessions have focused on understanding both the disruption of hydrologic functioning following discrete disturbances, as well as the subsequent recovery or change within the affected watershed system. Whereas some hydrologic disturbances are directly linked to anthropogenic activities, such as resource extraction, the contributions to this special issue focus primarily on those with indirect or less pronounced human involvement, such as bark-beetle infestation, wildfire, and other natural hazards. However, human activities are enhancing the severity and frequency of these seemingly natural disturbances, thereby contributing to acute hydrologic problems and hazards. Major research challenges for our increasingly disturbed planet include the lack of continuous pre- and post-disturbance monitoring, hydrologic impacts that vary spatially and temporally based on environmental and hydroclimatic conditions, and the preponderance of overlapping or compounding disturbance sequences. In addition, a conceptual framework for characterizing commonalities and differences among hydrologic disturbances is still in its infancy. In this introduction to the special issue, we advance the fusion of concepts and terminology from ecology and hydrology to begin filling this gap. We briefly explore some preliminary approaches for comparing different disturbances and their hydrologic impacts, which provides a starting point for further dialogue and research progress.

Water Resources Research↗
USGS2026

Resilience thinking for human-wildlife coexistence: Bridging dynamic systems, archetypes, and transformations

As human activities and wildlife increasingly overlap in the Anthropocene, conventional conservation paradigms focused on land-sparing are shifting toward strategies that support human–wildlife coexistence. However, achieving sustainable coexistence is often hindered by a limited understanding of the dynamic social–ecological processes that drive integrated human–wildlife systems. This Special Issue explores “resilience thinking” as a scientific framework to address these knowledge gaps. By bridging sustainability and wildlife sciences, we examine how concepts such as adaptive capacity, feedback loops, system archetypes, and tipping points can illuminate the conditions that facilitate stable coexistence or lead to persistent conflict. Through diverse global case studies ranging from carnivore management in Europe to primate interactions in Indonesia, contributions highlight how societal perceptions, governance, and co-adaptation shape system trajectories. Ultimately, we argue that fostering durable coexistence requires moving beyond incremental adaptation toward transformative governance that centers on equity, relationality, and proactive management.

Ambio↗
USGS2011

The cost of fear

What should parents do when they detect indications of more predators nearby that might eat their babies? This scenario is commonly faced by parents in the wild, and the consequences are important. The number of offspring that organisms produce has a major influence on fitness and, when averaged across a population, affects whether this population will increase or decrease. Offspring production thus has critical implications for evolution via fitness, and ecology and conservation via demography. On page 1398 of this issue, Zanette et al. ( 1 ) show that the fear of predation can, by itself, strongly affect the number of offspring produced over an annual cycle by song sparrows (see the figure).

Science↗
USGS2015

U.S. Geological Survey Chesapeake science strategy, 2015-2025—Informing ecosystem management of America’s largest estuary

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has the critical role of providing scientific information to improve the understanding and management of the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem. The USGS works with Federal, State, and academic science partners to provide research and monitoring, and communicate results of these activities to enhance ecosystem management for both the Chesapeake and other National ecosystems. The USGS Chesapeake Science Strategy was prepared to guide science activities to address the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement (2014–2025), to support the Department of the Interior (DOI) involvement in the Bay restoration efforts, and align with the USGS Mission Area (MA) Science strategies. The Chesapeake Bay is our Nation’s largest estuary, and provides critical goods and services to the people, fish, and wildlife that use the 64,000-square-mile watershed. The Chesapeake Bay watershed contains over 3,600 species of fish, wildlife, and plants and provides spawning grounds for many ecologically and economically important species including striped bass and blue crabs. The Bay watershed lies in the heart of the Atlantic Flyway and has 29 species of waterfowl, about 1 million of which winter in the region. The size of the Chesapeake seafood harvest is third in the Nation, only behind the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Along with agricultural production, tourism, and recreation, the estimated economic value of the services from the Chesapeake Bay watershed is about $100 billion annually. However, the health of the Bay ecosystem began to decline at the beginning of the 20th century due to overfishing and increasing human population and associated land change. The Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) is the Federal-State cooperative effort that started in 1983 to restore the Bay and watershed. Given the ecological and economic importance of the Chesapeake ecosystem, President Obama issued an Executive Order (EO) in 2009 for increased Federal leadership in the CBP to enhance the pace of restoration, and the supporting strategy was released in 2010. The EO directed the Federal Government, including the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), represented by the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS), and the USGS, to expand its efforts and increase leadership to restore the Bay and its watershed. The USGS and other Federal agencies expanded their activities in 2011 to meet the President’s Chesapeake EO. Since the EO was released, there have been several important changes in the USGS, DOI, and the CBP including: (1) the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement, (2) increased DOI leadership in the CBP, and (3) the release of the USGS MA science strategies. The EO strategy served as a foundation for the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement that was signed in 2014 by the CBP Partners, and has goals and outcomes to be met by 2025. The USGS developed the Chesapeake Science Strategy to guide our activities to address the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement, DOI leadership in the CBP, and USGS MA strategies. Improving the understanding of fish and wildlife population and health, and the factors affecting their condition is the emphasis of the Strategy. The science focuses on documenting the critical ecosystem connections in the Chesapeake, and providing implications to enhance decision making for restoration and conservation activities. The revised Strategy has four themes that address 7 of the 10 goals in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement: Enhance science to support restoration, and conservation of fish, wildlife, and critical habitats. Characterize and explain changes in water quality, and its effect on freshwater and estuarine ecosystems. Assess and forecast effects of climate and land change on ecosystem conditions. Synthesize and provide information to support ecosystem management. The structure and function of biological communities of the Bay and its watershed are extremely complex and are affected by a variety of stressors and conditions. To better define the issues being addressed, the USGS has developed cross-cutting questions that define some of the most important scientific challenges where multiple disciplines and collaborators are needed to address an issue. The initial questions include: How do land and climate changes affect freshwater fish communities, health, and habitats? What are the relations among land use, water quality, contaminants, and the health of fish and wildlife? How are coastal wetlands and their carrying capacity for waterbirds affected by changing climate and land use? How is the water quality of rivers and estuaries responding to restoration actions, and changing land use? What are some of the best opportunities for management actions to benefit multiple restoration outcomes?

Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virgin↗
USGS2021

Water-resource management monitoring needs, State of Hawai‘i

In cooperation with the State of Hawai‘i Commission on Water Resource Management and in collaboration with the University of Hawaiʻi Water Resources Research Center, the U.S. Geological Survey developed a water-resource monitoring program—a rainfall, surface-water, and groundwater data-collection program—that is required to meet State needs for water-resource assessment, management, and protection in Hawai‘i. Current and foreseeable issues related to water-resource management and climate-change effects guided the evaluation of data-collection sites within the monitoring program. Data-collection sites currently (2018) being operated in Hawai‘i were evaluated, and additional data-collection sites were selected on the basis of their usefulness for characterizing anthropogenic effects on water resources or representing natural conditions. Data-collection strategies consist of a combination of continuous long-term monitoring to evaluate trends and climate-change effects and occasional and periodic intensive monitoring to enhance spatial understanding of hydrologic conditions and to address current issues in priority areas—areas that currently have water-availability issues or are expected to have the greatest socioeconomic or ecological effects because of climate change. Priority areas for rainfall monitoring consist of urban and agricultural lands, areas with high rainfall and high-rainfall gradient, and areas within the trade-wind inversion band. Surface-water priority areas consist of streams with major surface-water diversions, with established interim instream-flow standards, in a surface-water management area, that support water leases, and with uncertainties in hydrogeologic characteristics. Priority areas for groundwater monitoring consist of areas with high withdrawal, declining water levels, reduced recharge, limited alternative sources, and uncertainties in hydrogeologic characteristics. Data-quality objectives for the rainfall, surface-water, and groundwater monitoring programs that describe anticipated uses of the data were established with the goal of producing useful, reliable, and accurate water-resource information of sufficient precision to support decision making. The data-quality objectives also consider quality-assurance and quality-control programs that ensure defensible data. Establishment of common data-quality objectives not only assures comparability of data collected by multiple agencies but also allows data from academic, private, and public organizations to be useful for meeting State monitoring needs, provided the data meet appropriate data-quality objectives and data-accessibility requirements.

Hawaii↗
USGS2010

Large reservoirs: Chapter 17

Large impoundments, defined as those with surface area of 200 ha or greater, are relatively new aquatic ecosystems in the global landscape. They represent important economic and environmental resources that provide benefits such as flood control, hydropower generation, navigation, water supply, commercial and recreational fisheries, and various other recreational and esthetic values. Construction of large impoundments was initially driven by economic needs, and ecological consequences received little consideration. However, in recent decades environmental issues have come to the forefront. In the closing decades of the 20th century societal values began to shift, especially in the developed world. Society is no longer willing to accept environmental damage as an inevitable consequence of human development, and it is now recognized that continued environmental degradation is unsustainable. Consequently, construction of large reservoirs has virtually stopped in North America. Nevertheless, in other parts of the world construction of large reservoirs continues. The emergence of systematic reservoir management in the early 20th century was guided by concepts developed for natural lakes (Miranda 1996). However, we now recognize that reservoirs are different and that reservoirs are not independent aquatic systems inasmuch as they are connected to upstream rivers and streams, the downstream river, other reservoirs in the basin, and the watershed. Reservoir systems exhibit longitudinal patterns both within and among reservoirs. Reservoirs are typically arranged sequentially as elements of an interacting network, filter water collected throughout their watersheds, and form a mosaic of predictable patterns. Traditional approaches to fisheries management such as stocking, regulating harvest, and in-lake habitat management do not always produce desired effects in reservoirs. As a result, managers may expend resources with little benefit to either fish or fishing. Some locally expressed effects, such as turbidity and water quality, zooplankton density and size composition, or fish growth rates and assemblage composition, are the upshot of large-scale factors operating outside reservoirs and not under the direct control of reservoir managers. Realistically, abiotic and biotic conditions in reservoirs are shaped by factors working inside and outside reservoirs, with the relative importance of external factors differing among reservoirs. With this perspective, large reservoirs are viewed from a habitat standpoint within the framework of a conceptual model in which individual reservoir characteristics are influenced by both local- and landscape-scale factors (Figure 17.1). In the sections that follow, how each element of this hierarchical model influences habitat and fish assemblages in reservoirs is considered. Important in-reservoir habitat issues and reservoirs as part of larger systems, where reservoir management requires looking for real solutions outside individual reservoirs are described.

Book chapter↗
USGS1994

Ecological perspective: Linking ecology, GIS, and remote sensing to ecosystem management

Awareness of significant human impacts on the ecology of Earth's landscapes is not new (Thomas 1956). Over the past decade (Forman and Godron 1986, Urban et a1. 1987) applications of geographic information systems (GIS) and remote sensing technologies have supported a rapid rise in landscape.stale research. The heightened recognition within the research community of the ecological linkages between local sites and larger spatial scales has spawned increasing calls for more holistic management of landscapes (Noss 1983, Harris 1984, Risser 1985, Norse et al. 1986, Agee and Johnson 1988, Franklin 1989, Brooks and Grant 1992, Endangered Species Update-Special Issue 1993, Crow 1994, Grumbine 1994). As a result agencies such as the U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and National Park Service are now converging on "ecosystem management" as a new paradigm to sustainably manage wildlands and maintain biodiversity. However, as this transition occurs, several impediments to implementation of this new paradigm persist, including (1) significant uncenainty among many land managers about the definition and goals of ecosystem management, (2) inadequate ecological information on the past and present processes and structural conditions of target ecosystems, (3) insufficient experience on the part of land managers with the rapidly diversifying array of GIS and remote sensing tools to effectively use them to support ecology-based land management, and (4) a paucity of intimate, long-term relationships between people (including land managers) and the particular landscape communities to which they belong. This chapter provides an ecological perspective on these issues as applied to ecosystem management in a southwestern U.S. landscape.

Book chapter↗
USGS2021

The ecology and evolution of synchronized reproduction in long-lived plants

Populations of many long-lived plants exhibit spatially synchronized seed production that varies extensively over time, so that seed production in some years is much higher than on average, while in others, it is much lower or absent. This phenomenon termed masting or mast seeding has important consequences for plant reproductive success, ecosystem dynamics and plant–human interactions. Inspired by recent advances in the field, this special issue presents a series of articles that advance the current understanding of the ecology and evolution of masting. To provide a broad overview, we reflect on the state-of-the-art of masting research in terms of underlying proximate mechanisms, ontogeny, adaptations, phylogeny and applications to conservation. While the mechanistic drivers and fitness consequences of masting have received most attention, the evolutionary history, ontogenetic trajectory and applications to plant–human interactions are poorly understood. With increased availability of long-term datasets across broader geographical and taxonomic scales, as well as advances in molecular approaches, we expect that many mysteries of masting will be solved soon. The increased understanding of this global phenomenon will provide the foundation for predictive modelling of seed crops, which will improve our ability to manage forests and agricultural fruit and nut crops in the Anthropocene.

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B:↗