Search USGSSearch

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Natural Science”

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

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

At least 127 records · Page 7Linked to original sources

Female Agassiz’s desert tortoise activity at a wind energy facility in southern California: The influence of an El Niño event

We compared spring-summer activity of adult female Agassiz’s Desert Tortoises ( Gopherus agassizii ) among three consecutive years (1997, 1998, and 1999) that differed dramatically in winter rainfall and annual plant production at a wind energy facility in the Sonoran Desert of southern California. Winter rainfall was approximately 71%, 190%, and 17% of the long-term average (October-March = 114 mm) for this area in water years (WY) 1997, 1998, and 1999, respectively. The substantial precipitation caused by an El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) event in WY 1998 produced a generous annual food plant supply (138.2 g dry biomass/ m 2 ) in the spring. Primary production of winter annuals during below average rainfall years (WY 1997 and WY 1999) was reduced to 98.3 and 0.2 g/m 2 , respectively. Mean rates of movement and mean body condition indices (mass/length) did not differ significantly among the years. The drought year following ENSO (WY 1999) was statistically similar to ENSO in every other measured value, while WY 1997 (end of a two year drought) was statistically different from ENSO using activity area, minimum number of burrows used, and percentage of non-movements. Our data suggest that female G. agassizii activity can be influenced by environmental conditions in previous years.

California

Cenozoic stratigraphy of Colorado

As a successor to previous Colorado stratigraphy charts (MS-53 Colorado Stratigraphic Chart and MS-54 Cretaceous Stratigraphy of Colorado), this Colorado Geological Survey (CGS) publication resulted from a collaboration between the CGS, USGS, and the Denver Museum of Nature and Science (DMNS). The chart was designed to illustrate Cenozoic stratigraphy spanning the state’s many sedimentary basins. It builds upon the work of dozens of colleagues and updates Richard Pearl’s seminal 1974 stratigraphy chart. The chart leverages the community’s stratigraphic work in both the subsurface and outcrop, and depicts new geochronologic constraints for many units. To facilitate comparison of strata to external forcing factors, the chart employs a linear timescale. Each unit’s dominant depositional environment is depicted, as are major mountain building events, erosional events, and regional unconformities.

Colorado

Park Break: collaborative opportunity established for graduate students

Among the many topics discussed during the 2007-2008 George Wright Society (GWS) board meetings was the subject of how to inspire students seeking careers in science and natural resource management to consider the Department of Interior (DOI) in general, and the National Park Service (NPS) and the US Geological Survey (USGS) in particular, as good options for future employment. Board members participating in these discussions included Suzette Kimball, now acting director of USGS, and Gillian Browser, now a research scientists with Colorado State University, who envisioned a program that would offer an alternative to the break from classes that universities typically offer students in early spring. Since those initial discussions among the GWS board members, Park Break sessions have been held in eleven different NPS sites across the country. Each session has sponsored six to eight graduate students in various stages off their university programs for a week-long seminar focused on a specific theme relevant to the host park, such as conversation policy and climate change. Sessions have varied in format but all generally have been composed of a week of field and classroom activity with participation from local, state, and national experts.

The George Wright Forum

Additions to the ichthyofauna of the Bahama Islands, with comments on endemic species

Literature records or other documentation are given for 57 species of shorefishes added to the Bahaman ichthyofauna since publication of Fishes of the Bahamas ; included are 32 new species described or discovered since 1967. Known distribution is specified for each species, including extralimital ranges of non-endemics. Fourteen species are listed as known only from the Bahamas although some likely occur elsewhere. It is concluded that the Bahamas has played a minor role in the evolution of Atlantic tropical marine fishes. [Bahaman ichthyofauna, endemism, new records]

Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of

Role of raptors in contaminant research

This chapter reviews the history of and approaches used in studies focused on the effects of contaminants on raptors and raptor populations at the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center (Patuxent) in Laurel, MD. Worldwide raptor declines following World War II were unprecedented and resulted in a sequence of major efforts at Patuxent to understand their cause(s). The peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), and osprey (Pandion haliaetus) were the species of most concern in North America. Laboratory and field studies at Patuxent complemented each other and yielded timely results of national and international importance, including some findings published in the journals “Science” and “Nature.” Concern about contaminant effects on wildlife populations came to the forefront during the years immediately following World War II. This concern was worldwide and not limited to one taxonomic group or to personnel and investigations at Patuxent. Contaminant studies of raptors were only part of the story, but this review, with minor exceptions, is limited to raptor studies and the role Patuxent played in this research. Indeed, many important nonraptor contaminant studies done at Patuxent, as well as raptor studies conducted elsewhere, are not mentioned here. For other reviews of contaminant-wildlife issues in the 1950s and 1960s, the reader is referred to “Silent Spring” by Rachel Carson (1962), “Pesticides and the Living Landscape” by Robert Rudd (1964), and “Return of the Peregrine: A North American Saga of Tenacity and Teamwork” by Tom Cade and Bill Burnham (Cade and Burnham, 2003).

Book chapter

Investigating gas hydrate as a factor in accretionary margin frontal ridge slope failures and cold seep biogeochemistry

During August 2008, a research expedition (2008-007-PGC) was carried out offshore Vancouver Island on the northern Cascadia Margin (Figure 1) to study the role of gas hydrate in slope stability and cold seep biogeochemistry. The cruise was organized by the Geological Survey of Canada (GSC) as part of the Earth Science Sector, Natural Gas Hydrate Program, Natural Resources Canada (NRCan). This international collaboration included McGill University, University of Victoria, the U.S. Geological Survey, Florida State University, and the U.S. Department of Energy.

Fire in the Ice: NETL Methane Hydrate Newsletter

Alaska Science Center: Providing Timely, Relevant, and Impartial Study of the Landscape, Natural Resources, and Natural Hazards for Alaska and Our Nation

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Nation's largest water, earth, and biological science and civilian mapping agency, has studied the natural features of Alaska since its earliest geologic expeditions in the 1800s. The USGS Alaska Science Center (ASC), with headquarters in Anchorage, Alaska, studies the complex natural science phenomena of Alaska to provide scientific products and results to a wide variety of partners. The complexity of Alaska's unique landscapes and ecosystems requires USGS expertise from many science disciplines to conduct thorough, integrated research.

Fact Sheet

NW CSC annual report fiscal year 2013

The Northwest Climate Science Center (NW CSC) was established in 2010 as one of eight regional Climate Science Centers created by the Department of the Interior (DOI). The NW CSC encompasses Washing-ton, Oregon, Idaho, and western Montana and has overlapping boundaries with three Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs): the Great Northern, the Great Basin, and the North Pacific. With guidance from its Executive Stakeholder Advisory Committee (ESAC), the NW CSC and its partner LCCs are addressing the highest priority regional climate science needs of Northwest natural and cultural resource managers. Climate Science Centers tap into the scientific expertise of both the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and academic institutions. The NW CSC is supported by an academic consortium with the capacity to generate climate science and tools in a coordinated fashion, serving stakeholders across the Northwest region. This consortium is primarily represented by Oregon State University (OSU), the University of Id-ho (UI), and the University of Washington (UW). The academic consortium and USGS provide capabilities in climate science, ecology, impacts and vulnerability assessment, modeling, adaptation planning, and advanced information technology, all necessary to address and respond to climate change in the Northwest. University members also recruit and train graduate students and early-career scientists. This Annual Report summarizes progress for the goals set out in the NW CSC Strategic Plan for 2012-2015 (http://www.doi.gov/csc/northwest/upload/Northwest-CSC-Strategic-Plan.cfm) and the NW CSC Work-plan for Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 (October 1, 2012 through September 30, 2013). The report follows the structure of the Strategic Plan, which describes the five core services (Executive, Science, Data, Communications, and Education and Training) provided by the NW CSC in support of the stated vision: Our Vision: To become nationally recognized as a best-practice model for the provision of climate science and decision support tools to address conservation and management issues in the Pacific Northwest Region.

Report

The gap between experts, farmers and non-farmers on perceived environmental vulnerability and the influence of values and beliefs

Science has played a mixed role in guiding conservation and sustainability-oriented decision-making by individuals, policymakers, institutions, and governments. Not all science-based conservation and sustainability initiatives that address issues facing humanity and ecosystems and global problems have gained public support. Conservation decisions and policy prescriptions are and may be based on perceptions about and experiences with the environment, local land use, and ecosystems that may not align with or be grounded in science or evidence from experts in the field. Values, beliefs, and perceptions associated with nature play a critical role in how individuals view biodiversity conservation, sustainability, and natural resource management . This study first examines the gap between experts (scientists and other field experts) and the public (farmers and non-farmers) about the state of water and land resources, wildlife and associated habitats, and aquatic biodiversity in the Smoky Hill River Watershed in western Kansas. Second, the study examines the role that values and beliefs play in shaping environmental perceptions for farmers and non-farmers. Analysis confirms that a gap between experts and farmers/non-farmers does exist, especially with respect to the state of the Ogallala Aquifer, playas, rivers and streams, lakes and reservoirs, native grasslands, wildlife habitats, farmland, native fish populations, and wildlife species. Ordered-logistic regression analyses, meanwhile, indicate that farmer and non-farmer perceptions about the state of the local environment are influenced by traditional and self-interested values, as well as environmental values and beliefs, but less so by religiosity and political ideology. Despite broad takeaways, results exhibited heterogeneity across the farmer and non-farmer subpopulations. If environmental professionals cannot align ecological data, stakeholders’ values/perceptions, and policies, then the existing body of technical research and management on sustainability in natural and social sciences may be of little value.

Journal of Environmental Management

Earth science and public health: Proceedings of the Second National Conference on USGS Health-Related Research

The mission of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is to serve the Nation by providing reliable scientific information to describe and understand the earth; minimize loss of life and property from natural disasters; manage water, biological, energy, and mineral resources; and enhance and protect our quality of life. As the Nation?s largest water, earth, and biological science and civilian mapping agency, the USGS can play a significant role in providing scientific knowledge and information that will improve our understanding of the relations of environment and wildlife to human health and disease. USGS human health-related research is unique in the Federal government because it brings together a broad spectrum of natural science expertise and information, including extensive data collection and monitoring on varied landscapes and ecosystems across the Nation. USGS can provide a great service to the public health community by synthesizing the scientific information and knowledge on our natural and living resources that influence human health, and by bringing this science to the public health community in a manner that is most useful. Partnerships with health scientists and managers are essential to the success of these efforts. USGS scientists already are working closely with the public health community to pursue rigorous inquiries into the connections between natural science and public health. Partnering agencies include the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Agency for Toxic Substances Disease Registry, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Food and Drug Administration, Mine Safety and Health Administration, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Public Health Service, and the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases. Collaborations between public health scientists and earth scientists can lead to improved solutions for existing and emerging environmental health problems. This report summarizes the presentations and discussions held at the Second National Conference on USGS Health-Related Research, held at the USGS national headquarters in Reston, Virginia. The report presents 68 abstracts of technical presentations made at the conference and summaries of six topical breakout sessions. The abstracts cover a broad range of issues and demonstrate connections between human health and the quality and condition of our environment and wildlife. The summaries of the topical breakout sessions present ideas for advancing interdisciplinary science in areas of earth science and human health.

Scientific Investigations Report

Foreward: Geology Field Trips in and around the U.S. Capital

The first annual meeting of the Geological Society of America (GSA) was held in 1888 in Ithaca, New York (Fairchild, 1932), but official Sections of GSA formed much later. During the spring of 1949, a symposium in Knoxville, Tennessee, on mineral resources of the southeastern United States became the catalyst for the creation of the Southeastern Section of the Geological Society of America (King, 1964), and the first annual meeting of the Southeastern Section was held in 1952 in Roanoke, Virginia (Wilson, 1954). The Northeastern Section formed much later, and its first annual meeting was held in 1966 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Socolow, 1968). At all of these section meetings, field trips have been important venues for geologists and especially students to gather together, examine rocks in the field, and discuss ideas. These field trips have been especially important at combined section meetings because they provide settings for geologists who are experienced in one geographic region to examine and compare the geology of other regions. The first combined meeting of the Southeastern and Northeastern sections occurred in 1976 in Arlington, Virginia. Since then, the Southeastern and Northeastern sections have met together on numerous occasions, including 1982 in Washington, DC; 1991 in Baltimore, Maryland; 2004 in Tysons Corner, Virginia; and 2010 in Baltimore, Maryland. Since the first combined section meeting in 1976, there has been a gradual increase in the role of technology in geology field studies. In fact, during the past several decades there has been an increase in emphasis in our society on the instrumental component of science, the goal of which is operational techniques to do or control things, and a corresponding decrease in emphasis on the natural philosophy component of science, the goal of which is a greater understanding of the natural world (Dear, 2006). The modern education acronym STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics), for example, is often used as a catch-all term that implies that science and technology are relatively synonymous, and implies that greater technology leads automatically to greater understanding of the natural world. This assumption, however, is not always valid (Dear, 2006), and technology should not be promoted as a substitute for field experiences. Technology can be a tool that leads to greater understanding of the natural world, but not all Science uses technology as a means of providing greater understanding. The benefits of new technologies include: (1) data of greater resolution; and (2) greater efficiency of capturing, storing, and visualizing data. The risks of new technologies include: (1) an overabundance of data, some of which may be of little value; (2) less time available for analysis of data, if geologists become occupied primarily with capturing and storing data; and (3) errors that arise from complacency and the perception that field-checking may not be necessary. In other words, there is a risk that a glut of data and vast amounts of time devoted to the capturing and storing of data may result in a reduced interest and (or) willingness to field-check data. In the spirit of the early GSA section meetings, we feel that there are still enormous advantages to conducting geology field trips in conjunction with traditional meeting presentations and posters. In 2020, with this current combined Southeastern and Northeastern section meeting in Reston, Virginia, we have assembled eight different field trips that cover a wide range of territory in and around the Nation’s capital. These field trip localities include the immediate vicinity of Washington, DC, as well as various locations in nearby areas of Virginia, Maryland, and West Virginia. The physiographic provinces include Mesozoic Rift Basins, the Piedmont, the Blue Ridge, the Valley and Ridge, and the Allegheny Plateau of the Appalachian Basin. The field trip sites exhibit a wide range of igneous, metamorphic, and sedimentary rocks, as well as rocks with a wide range of geologic ages from the Mesoproterozoic to the Holocene. We hope that this guidebook provides new motivation for geologists to examine rocks in the field, to discuss ideas with colleagues in the field, and to avoid becoming complacent. The editors of this volume would like to thank the authors of the different field trip guides, the field trip leaders, and all of the reviewers who made suggestions for improving the field trip manuscripts. The editors would also like to thank Elle Derwent of GSA for her logistical help and guidance regarding the field trips, and April Leo and the staff of the GSA Publications Department for seeing this book through to publication.

Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia

Fort Collins Science Center Ecosystem Dynamics branch--interdisciplinary research for addressing complex natural resource issues across landscapes and time

The Ecosystem Dynamics Branch of the Fort Collins Science Center offers an interdisciplinary team of talented and creative scientists with expertise in biology, botany, ecology, geology, biogeochemistry, physical sciences, geographic information systems, and remote-sensing, for tackling complex questions about natural resources. As demand for natural resources increases, the issues facing natural resource managers, planners, policy makers, industry, and private landowners are increasing in spatial and temporal scope, often involving entire regions, multiple jurisdictions, and long timeframes. Needs for addressing these issues include (1) a better understanding of biotic and abiotic ecosystem components and their complex interactions; (2) the ability to easily monitor, assess, and visualize the spatially complex movements of animals, plants, water, and elements across highly variable landscapes; and (3) the techniques for accurately predicting both immediate and long-term responses of system components to natural and human-caused change. The overall objectives of our research are to provide the knowledge, tools, and techniques needed by the U.S. Department of the Interior, state agencies, and other stakeholders in their endeavors to meet the demand for natural resources while conserving biodiversity and ecosystem services. Ecosystem Dynamics scientists use field and laboratory research, data assimilation, and ecological modeling to understand ecosystem patterns, trends, and mechanistic processes. This information is used to predict the outcomes of changes imposed on species, habitats, landscapes, and climate across spatiotemporal scales. The products we develop include conceptual models to illustrate system structure and processes; regional baseline and integrated assessments; predictive spatial and mathematical models; literature syntheses; and frameworks or protocols for improved ecosystem monitoring, adaptive management, and program evaluation. The descriptions in this fact sheet provide snapshots of our three research emphases, followed by descriptions of select current projects.

Fact Sheet

Grounding simulation models with qualitative case studies: Toward a holistic framework to make climate science usable for US public land management

Policies directing agencies and public land managers to incorporate climate change into management face several barriers. These stem, in part, from a disconnect between the information that is produced and the information needs of local resource managers. A disproportionate focus on the natural and physical sciences in climate vulnerability and adaptation assessment obscure understandings of complex social systems and the interactions and feedbacks in social-ecological systems. We use a qualitative case study of bison management on Department of the Interior-managed and tribal lands to explore how a social-science driven Determinants and Analogue Vulnerability Assessment (DAVA) can inform ecological response models, specifically simulation models that account for multiple drivers of change. First, we illustrate how a DAVA approach can help to: 1) identify key processes, entities, and interactions across scales; 2) document local impacts, indicators, and monitoring efforts of drought and climate; and 3) identify major tradeoffs and uncertainties. We then demonstrate how qualitative narratives can inform simulation models by: 1) prioritizing model components included in modeling efforts; 2) framing joint management and climate scenarios; and 3) parameterizing and evaluating model performance. We do this by presenting a conceptual joint agent-based/state-and-transition simulation modeling framework. Simulation models can represent multiple interacting variables and can identify surprising, emergent outcomes that might not be evident from qualitative analysis alone, and we argue that qualitative case studies can ground simulation models in local contexts and help make them more structurally realistic and useful. Together, these can provide a step toward developing actionable climate change adaptation strategies.

Climate Risk Management

National Park Service Vegetation Mapping Inventory Program: Great Smoky Mountains National Park vegetation mapping project

The National Park Service (NPS) Vegetation Mapping Inventory (VMI) Program is an effort to classify, describe, and map existing vegetation communities in national park units throughout the United States. The NPS VMI Program is managed by the NPS Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Inventory and Monitoring Program and provides baseline vegetation information to natural resource managers, researchers, and ecologists. The U.S. Geological Survey Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center, NatureServe, and NPS Great Smoky Mountains National Park (GRSM, also referred to as the “Park”) have completed vegetation classification and mapping of GRSM, including the Foothills Parkway, for the NPS VMI Program. Mappers, ecologists, and botanists collaborated to affirm vegetation types of GRSM and to determine how best to map the vegetation types by using aerial imagery. A vegetation classification developed in 2003 by NatureServe and the NPS served as a foundation to further classify and map the vegetation types of the Park. Data from an additional 10 vegetation plots supported vegetation types either rare or not documented in the 2003 classification. Data from 203 verification sites were collected to test the field key to vegetation types and the application of vegetation types to a sample set of map polygons. Furthermore, data from 972 accuracy assessment (AA) sites were collected (of which 966 were used to test accuracy of the vegetation map layer). This GRSM vegetation mapping project identified 112 vegetation types consisting of 105 association types in the U.S. National Vegetation Classification (USNVC), 2 “park-special” types, 1 “map-special” type, and 4 cultural types in the USNVC. To map the vegetation and land cover of GRSM, 52 map classes were developed. Of these 52 map classes, 46 represent natural (including ruderal) vegetation types, most of which types are recognized in the USNVC. For the remaining 6 of the 52 map classes, 4 represent USNVC cultural types for agricultural and developed areas, and 2 represent non-USNVC types for nonvegetated open water and nonvegetated rock. Features were interpreted from viewing four-band digital aerial imagery using digital onscreen three-dimensional stereoscopic workflow systems in geographic information systems; digital aerial imagery was collected during September 23–October 30, 2015. The interpreted data were digitally and spatially referenced, thus making the spatial-database layers usable in a geographic information system. Polygon units were mapped to either a 0.5- or 0.25- hectare (ha) minimum mapping unit, depending on vegetation type. A geodatabase containing several feature-class layers and tables provides the locations and data of USNVC vegetation types (vegetation map layer), vegetation plots, verification sites, AA sites, project boundary extent, and aerial image centers and flight lines. Covering 210,875 ha, the feature-class layer and related tables for the vegetation map layer provide 34,084 polygons of detailed attribute data when special modifiers are not considered (average polygon size of 6.2 ha) and 36,589 polygons of detailed attribute data when special modifiers are considered (average polygon size of 5.8 ha). Each map polygon is assigned a map-class code and name and, when applicable, are linked to USNVC classification tables within the geodatabase. The vegetation map extent includes the administrative boundary for GRSM and the Foothills Parkway. A summary report, generated from the vegetation map layer, concludes that the 46 map classes representing natural (including ruderal) vegetation types apply to 99.2% of polygons (33,797 polygons; average size of 6.2 ha) and cover 98.6% of the Park (207,971.4 ha). Further broken down, map classes representing natural vegetation types indicate that the Park is 97.7% forest and woodland (205,882.5 ha), 0.6% shrubland (1,174.6 ha), and 0.4% herbaceous (914.3 ha). Map classes representing cultural vegetation types apply to 0.8% of polygons (259 polygons; average size of 4.9 ha) and cover 0.6% of the Park (1,277.4 ha). Map classes representing nonvegetation open and flowing water and unvegetated rock apply to 0.08% of polygons (28 polygons; average size of 58.1 ha) and cover 0.8% of the Park (1,625.9 ha). A thematic AA study was completed of map classes representing the natural (including ruderal) vegetation types of the Park. Initial AA results were discussed with NPS staff from the Park. Following input from NPS staff on how to handle map classes that fell below accuracy standards, adjustments were made to the vegetation map layer. Final results indicate an overall accuracy of 80.64% (kappa index of 79.96% for chance agreements) based on data from 966 of the 972 AA sites. Most individual map-class themes exceed the NPS VMI Program standard of 80% with a 90% confidence interval. The GRSM vegetation mapping project delivers many geospatial and vegetation data products, including an in-depth project report discussing methods and results, which includes map classification and map-class descriptions. This suite of products also includes descriptions and a field key to vegetation types; a database of vegetation plots, verification sites, and AA sites; digital images of field sites; field data sheets; digital aerial imagery; hardcopy and digital maps; a geodatabase of vegetation and land cover (map layer), field sites (vegetation plots, verification sites, and AA sites), aerial imagery index, project boundary, and metadata; and a contingency table listing AA results. Geospatial products are projected in the Universal Transverse Mercator, Zone 17 North, by using the North American Datum of 1983. Information on the NPS VMI Program and completed mapping projects are on the internet at https://www.nps.gov/im/vegetation-inventory.htm.

North Carolina, Tennessee

Developing an Analytical Framework: Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Decision Making - Proceedings of a Workshop

The analytical framework for understanding ecosystem services in conservation, resource management, and development decisions is multidisciplinary, encompassing a combination of the natural and social sciences. This report summarizes a workshop on 'Developing an Analytical Framework: Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Decision Making,' which focused on the analytical process and on identifying research priorities for assessing ecosystem services, their production and use, their spatial and temporal characteristics, their relationship with natural systems, and their interdependencies. Attendees discussed research directions and solutions to key challenges in developing the analytical framework. The discussion was divided into two sessions: (1) the measurement framework: quantities and values, and (2) the spatial framework: mapping and spatial relationships. This workshop was the second of three preconference workshops associated with ACES 2008 (A Conference on Ecosystem Services): Using Science for Decision Making in Dynamic Systems. These three workshops were designed to explore the ACES 2008 theme on decision making and how the concept of ecosystem services can be more effectively incorporated into conservation, restoration, resource management, and development decisions. Preconference workshop 1, 'Developing a Vision: Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Decision Making,' was held on April 15, 2008, in Cambridge, MA. In preconference workshop 1, participants addressed what would have to happen to make ecosystem services be used more routinely and effectively in conservation, restoration, resource management, and development decisions, and they identified some key challenges in developing the analytical framework. Preconference workshop 3, 'Developing an Institutional Framework: Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Decision Making,' was held on October 30, 2008, in Albuquerque, NM; participants examined the relationship between the institutional framework and the use of ecosystem services in decision making.

Open-File Report