SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “The Wildlife Professional”

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.

At least 127 records · Page 7Linked to original sources

USGS2019

U.S. Geological Survey science for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative—2017 annual report

The Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative (WLCI) was established in 2008 to address the scientific and conservation questions associated with land use changes because of energy development and other factors in southwest Wyoming. Over the past decade, partners from U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), State and Federal land management agencies, universities, and the public have collaborated to implement a long-term (defined here as more than 10 years), science-based program that assesses and enhances the quality and quantity of wildlife habitats in this region while facilitating responsible development. The USGS Science Team completes scientific research and develops tools that inform and support WLCI partner planning, decision making, and on-the-ground management actions. In fiscal year 2017, USGS published 18 products (including peer-reviewed journal articles, USGS series publications, and data releases), prepared an additional 7 products for publication, and presented 14 talks or posters at professional scientific meetings in addition to numerous informal presentations to WLCI partners at meetings and workshops. In this report, we summarize the science themes that describe USGS science for the WLCI and highlight work completed in fiscal year 2017 for each science theme. We also provide information on how USGS science is being used by land managers to better achieve habitat conservation objectives.

Wyoming↗

USGS2005

The Colorado Plateau II: biophysical, socioeconomic, and cultural research

The publication of The Colorado Plateau: Cultural, Biological, and Physical Research in 2004 marked a timely summation of current research in the Four Corners states. This new volume, derived from the seventh Biennial Conference on the Colorado Plateau in 2003, complements the previous book by focusing on the integration of science into resource management issues. The 32 chapters range in content from measuring human impacts on cultural resources, through grazing and the wildland-urban interface issues, to parameters of climate change on the Plateau. The book also introduces economic perspectives by considering shifting patterns and regional disparities in the Colorado Plateau economy. A series of chapters on mountain lions explores the human-wildland interface. These chapters deal with the entire spectrum of challenges associated with managing this large mammal species in Arizona and on the Colorado Plateau, conveying a wealth of timely information of interest to wildlife managers and enthusiasts. Another provocative set of chapters on biophysical resources explores the management of forest restoration, from the micro scale all the way up to large-scale GIS analyses of ponderosa pine ecosystems on the Colorado Plateau. Given recent concerns for forest health in the wake of fires, severe drought, and bark-beetle infestation, these chapters will prove enlightening for forest service, park service, and land management professionals at both the federal and state level, as well as general readers interested in how forest management practices will ultimately affect their recreation activities. With broad coverage that touches on topics as diverse as movement patterns of rattlesnakes, calculating watersheds, and rescuing looted rockshelters, this volume stands as a compendium of cutting-edge research on the Colorado Plateau that offers a wealth of insights for many scholars.

Utah;Colorado;Arizona;New Mexico↗

USGS2008

GAP Analysis Bulletin Number 15

The Mission of the Gap Analysis Project (GAP) <http://gapanalysis.nbii.gov> is to promote conservation by providing broad geographic information on biological diversity to resource managers, planners, and policy makers who can use the information to make informed decisions. As part of the National Biological Information Infrastructure (NBII) <http://www.nbii.gov>?a collaborative program to provide increased access to data and information on the nation?s biological resources--GAP data and analytical tools have been used in hundreds of applications: from basic research to comprehensive state wildlife plans; from educational projects in schools to ecoregional assessments of biodiversity. The challenge: keeping common species common means protecting them BEFORE they become threatened. To do this on a state or regional basis requires key information such as land cover descriptions, predicted distribution maps for native animals, and an assessment of the level of protection currently given to those plants and animals. GAP works cooperatively with Federal, state, and local natural resource professionals and academics to provide this kind of information. GAP activities focus on the creation of state and regional databases and maps that depict patterns of land management, land cover, and biodiversity. These data can be used to identify ?gaps? in conservation--instances where an animal or plant community is not adequately represented on the existing network of conservation lands. GAP is administered through the U.S. Geological Survey. Through building partnerships among disparate groups, GAP hopes to foster the kind of collaboration that is needed to address conservation issues on a broad scale. For more information, contact: John Mosesso National GAP Director 703-648-4079 Kevin Gergely National GAP Operations Manager 208-885-3565

GAP Bulletin↗

USGS2009

Gap Analysis -A geographic approach to planning for biological diversity

The Mission of the Gap Analysis Project (GAP) is to promote conservation by providing broad geographic information on biological diversity to resource managers, planners, and policy makers who can use the information to make informed decisions. As part of the National Biological Information Infrastructure (NBII) —a collaborative program to provide increased access to data and information on the nation’s biological resources--GAP data and analytical tools have been used in hundreds of applications: from basic research to comprehensive state wildlife plans; from educational projects in schools to ecoregional assessments of biodiversity. The challenge: keeping common species common means protecting them BEFORE they become threatened. To do this on a state or regional basis requires key information such as land cover descriptions, predicted distribution maps for native animals, and an assessment of the level of protection currently given to those plants and animals. GAP works cooperatively with Federal, state, and local natural resource professionals and academics to provide this kind of information. GAP activities focus on the creation of state and regional databases and maps that depict patterns of land management, land cover, and biodiversity. These data can be used to identify “gaps” in conservation--instances where an animal or plant community is not adequately represented on the existing network of conservation lands. GAP is administered through the U.S. Geological Survey. Through building partnerships among disparate groups, GAP hopes to foster the kind of collaboration that is needed to address conservation issues on a broad scale.

GAP Bulletin↗

USGS2017

Guidance documents: Continued support to improve operations of fish hatcheries and field sites to reduce the impact or prevent establishment of New Zealand Mudsnails and other invasive mollusks

This project tested and revised a risk assessment/management tool authored by Moffitt and Stockton designed to provide hatchery biologists and others a structure to measure risk and provide tools to control, prevent or eliminate invasive New Zealand mudsnails (NZMS) and other invasive mollusks in fish hatcheries and hatchery operations. The document has two parts: the risk assessment tool, and an appendix that summarizes options for control or management. The framework of the guidance document for risk assessment/hatchery tool combines approaches used by the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) process with those developed by the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC), of Canada, Mexico, and the United States, in the Tri-National Risk Assessment Guidelines for Aquatic Alien Invasive Species. The framework approach for this attached first document assesses risk potential with two activities: probability of infestation and consequences of infestation. Each activity is treated equally to determine the risk potential. These two activities are divided into seven basic elements that utilize scientific, technical, and other relevant information in the process of the risk assessment. To determine the probability of infestation four steps are used that have scores reported or determined and averaged. This assessment follows a familiar HACCP process to assess pathways of entry, entry potential, colonization potential, spread potential. The economic, environmental and social consequences are considered as economic impact, environmental impact, and social and cultural influences. To test this document, the Principal Investigator worked to identify interested hatchery managers through contacts at regional aquaculture meetings, fish health meetings, and through the network of invasive species managers and scientists participating in the Western Regional Panel on Aquatic Nuisance Species and the 100th Meridian Initiative's Columbia River Basin Team, and the Western New Zealand Mudsnail Conference in Seattle. Targeted hatchery workshops were conducted with staff at Dworshak National Fish Hatchery Complex (ID), Similkameen Pond, Oroville WA, and Ringold Springs State Hatchery (WA). As a result of communications with hatchery staff, invasive species managers, and on site assessments of hatchery facilities, the document was modified and enhanced. Additional resources were added to keep it up to date. The result is a more simplified tool that can lead hatchery or management personnel through the process of risk assessment and provide an introduction to the risk management and communication process. In addition to the typical HACCP processes, this tool adds steps to rate and consider uncertainty and the weight of evidence regarding options and monitoring results . Uncertainty of outcome exists in most tools that can be used to control or prevent NZMS or other invasive mollusks from infesting an area. In additional this document emphasizes that specific control tools and plans must be tailored to each specific setting to consider the economic, environmental and social influences. From the testing and evaluation process, there was a strong recognition that a number of control and prevention tools previously suggested and reported in the literature from laboratory and small scale trials may not be compatible with regional and national regulations, economic constraints, social or cultural constraints, engineering or water chemistry characteristics of each facility. The options for control are summarized in the second document, Review of Control Measures for Hatcheries Infested with NZMS (Appendix A) that provides sources for additional resources and specific tools, and guidance regarding the feasibility and success of each approach. This tool also emphasizes that management plans need to be adaptive and incorporate oversight from professionals familiar with measuring risks of fish diseases, and treatments (e.g. the fish health practitioners and water quality and effluent management teams). Finally, with such a team, the adaptive management approach must be ongoing, and become a regular component of hatchery operations. Although it was the intent that this two part document would be included as part of the revised National Management and Control Plan for the NZMS proposed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and others, it is provided as a stand-alone document.

Cooperator Science Series↗

USGS2010

Fort Collins Science Center-Fiscal year 2009 science accomplishments

Public land and natural resource managers in the United States are confronted with increasingly complex decisions that have important ramifications for both ecological and human systems. The scientists and technical professionals at the U.S. Geological Survey Fort Collins Science Center?many of whom are at the forefront of their fields?possess a unique blend of ecological, socioeconomic, and technological expertise. Because of this diverse talent, Fort Collins Science Center staff are able to apply a systems approach to investigating complicated ecological problems in a way that helps answer critical management questions. In addition, the Fort Collins Science Center has a long record of working closely with the academic community through cooperative agreements and other collaborations. The Fort Collins Science Center is deeply engaged with other U.S. Geological Survey science centers and partners throughout the Department of the Interior. As a regular practice, we incorporate the expertise of these partners in providing a full complement of ?the right people? to effectively tackle the multifaceted research problems of today's resource-management world. In Fiscal Year 2009, the Fort Collins Science Center's scientific and technical professionals continued research vital to Department of the Interior's science and management needs. Fort Collins Science Center work also supported the science needs of other Federal and State agencies as well as non-government organizations. Specifically, Fort Collins Science Center research and technical assistance focused on client and partner needs and goals in the areas of biological information management and delivery, enterprise information, fisheries and aquatic systems, invasive species, status and trends of biological resources (including human dimensions), terrestrial ecosystems, and wildlife resources. In the process, Fort Collins Science Center science addressed natural-science information needs identified in the U.S. Geological Survey Science Strategy (http://www.usgs.gov/science_strategy), including understanding and predicting change in ecosystems, climate variability and change, energy development and land management, the role of the environment and wildlife in human health, freshwater ecosystems, data integration, and evolving technologies. Several science projects were expanded in Fiscal Year 2009 to meet these evolving needs.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2012

Nature's Notebook 2011: Data & participant summary

Introduction The USA National Phenology Network The USA National Phenology Network (USA‐NPN; www.usanpn.org) seeks to engage a diverse range of citizen scientist volunteers, federal, state, and non‐governmental organizations, educators and professional research scientists to collect phenological observations of plants and animals using consistent standards and to contribute their observations to a national data repository. To guide this effort, the USA‐NPN National Coordinating Office (NCO), based in Tucson, Arizona, implemented an online monitoring program for plants and animals, Nature's Notebook , and has developed phenology monitoring protocols and an information management system, which includes the National Phenology Database (NPDb). We are developing a diversity of materials, tools, techniques, and protocols to assist decision making and education related to ecology, wildlife, human health, ecosystem services, natural resource management, biological conservation, and climate change adaptation.

USA-NPN Technical Series↗

USGS2017

Anticoagulant rodenticides and wildlife: Concluding remarks

Rodents are known to affect human society globally in various adverse ways, resulting in a widespread demand for their continuous control. Anticoagulant rodenticides (ARs) have been, and currently remain, the cornerstone of rodent control throughout the world. Although alternative control methods exist, they are generally less effective. ARs work by affecting vitamin K metabolism, thereby preventing the activation of blood clotting factors and eventual coagulopathy. Since ARs are non-selective, their undoubted benefits for rodent control have to be balanced against the environmental risks that these compounds pose. Although they have been used for decades, pharmacokinetic and toxicokinetic data are mainly available for laboratory mammals and have concentrated on acute effects. Limited information is available on chronic exposure scenarios and for wildlife species. Important gaps exist in our understanding of the large inter- and intra-species differences in sensitivity to ARs, especially for non-target species, and in our knowledge about the occurrence and importance of sub-lethal effects in wildlife. It is clear that mere presence of AR residues in the body tissues may not indicate the occurrence of effects, although unequivocal assessment of effects under field conditions is difficult. Ante-mortem symptoms, like lethargy, subdued behaviour and unresponsiveness are generally not very specific as is true for more generic post-mortem observations (e.g. pallor of the mucous membranes or occurrence of haemorrhages). It is only by combining ante or post-mortem data with information on exposure that effects in the field may be confirmed. We do know however that a wide variety of non-target species are directly exposed to ARs. Secondary exposure in predators is also widespread although there is limited information on whether this exposure causes actual effects. Exposure is driven by ecological factors and is context specific with respect to spatial habitat configuration and bait placement. Another key factor that affects the interaction between ARs and wildlife is the development of resistance in target species. The development of resistance has resulted in higher use of SGARs, thereby increasing the potential of non-target and secondary exposure. AR use has increasingly become more strictly regulated, increasing the need for alternatives. Alternatives are available, including non-anticoagulant rodenticides, but these may also pose significant risk to environmental organisms, humans and pets. There are also various mitigation measures that can be implemented when using ARs, including bait protection, pulsed baiting at the onset of infestation, restricting use by non-professionals, and avoiding use in areas of high non-target density. Reduction in secondary exposure may result from e.g. non-chemical control, habitat management, and, in agricultural habitats, the use of lure crops and supplemental feeding. Such Integrated Pest Management (IPM) may not only reduce non-target exposure but also benefit resistance management. Barriers to adopt IPM approaches however, include the perception that they do not work or too slowly and are more laborious, expensive and time consuming. It is therefore important that the expectations of stakeholders are considered and managed. Nevertheless, further development of alternatives and IPM measures is essential, so the key research priority related to rodent control may ultimately be to address the lack of scientific assessment of the effectiveness of both specific AR mitigation measures and of IPM approaches to rodent control.

Book chapter↗

USGS2007

Yellowstone grizzly bear investigations: Annual report of the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team, 2006

The contents of this Annual Report summarize results of monitoring and research from the 2006 field season. The report also contains a summary of nuisance grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos horribilis ) management actions. The Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team (IGBST) continues to work on issues associated with counts of unduplicated females with cubs-of- the-year (COY). These counts are used to establish a minimum population size, which is then used to establish mortality thresholds for the Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 1993). After considerable delays due to programming issues, a computer program that defines the rule set used by Knight et al. (1995) to differentiate unique family groups was development and tested in 2005 and 2006. Simulations using observations of collared females with COY were randomly sampled to generate datasets of observations of random females with COY. These datasets were then run though the simulations program to test the accuracy of the rules. Data are currently being summarized. This project has been completed and a manuscript was submitted to the Journal of Wildlife Management. The grizzly bear recovery plan (USFWS 1993) established human-caused mortality quotas. We used the latest information on reproduction and survival to estimate population trajectory in the same simulation model originally used by Harris (1984). A Wildlife Monographs was published in 2006. Additionally, the study team, in cooperation with several quantitative experts, reassessed how population size is indexed and how sustainable mortality rates are established. A draft report was presented to the Yellowstone Ecosystem Subcommittee in spring 2005. It was published as part of the USFWS Delisting Rule (Federal Register Vol. 70, No. 221, Nov. 17, 2005, 69853–69884) and subjected to public comment. This workshop document can be found at http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/grizzly/yellowstone.htm. During the summer of 2006, a second workshop was held to address public comment and professional peer review. The result of this workshop was a supplement to the 2005 workshop document. This supplement can be found at http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/grizzly/yellowstone.htm under the link Revised Methods to Estimate Population Size and Sustainable Mortality Limits. Results of those estimates are provided in Appendix A. Our project addressing the potential application of stable isotopes and trace elements to quantify consumption rates of whitebark pine ( Pinus albicaulis ) and cutthroat trout ( Oncorhynchus clarki ) by grizzly bears was completed. Our manuscript on consumption rates of whitebark pine was published in the Canadian Journal of Zoology 81:763-770. Results of the mercury studies were also published in the Canadian Journal of Zoology 82:493–501. Copies can be found on the IGBST website http://www.nrmsc.usgs.gov/research/igbst-home.htm. Based upon this work, we submitted a proposal to analyze all historic tissue samples from grizzly bears in the ecosystem. That proposal was funded and samples have been sent to a lab for isotopic analysis. We hope to have those results in early 2008. Results of DNA hair snaring work conducted on Yellowstone Lake were submitted and published in the Journal Ursus (Haroldson et al. 2005). Results of this study conducted from 1997–2000 showed a decline in fish use by grizzly bears when compared to earlier work conducted by Reinhart (1990) in 1985–1987. As a consequence, the IGBST submitted a proposal to the National Park Service and received 3 years funding to repeat that work. This project began in 2007. There are 2 graduate students and several field technicians working on the program. We completed the final field season in Grand Teton National Park evaluating habitat use both temporally and spatially between grizzly and black bears ( Ursus americanus ). We continue to use GPS technology that incorporates a spread spectrum communication system. Spread spectrum allows for transfer of stored GPS locations from the collar to a remote receiving station. Results of the 2006 field season are reported here. We plan to complete the final report in late 2007. We continued to monitor the health of whitebark pine in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) in cooperation with the Greater Yellowstone Whitebark Pine Monitoring Working Group. A summary of the 2006 monitoring is also presented (Appendix B). The IGBST uses counts of winter-killed ungulates to index spring carcass abundance for grizzly bears. Likewise, we use wier counts and stream surveys to index cutthroat trout abundance. We ask Dr. Steve Cherry, Department of Mathematical Sciences, Montana State University-Bozeman, to review the protocols and make recommendations for improving them. That review and recommendations are presented in Appendix C. Finally, the state of Wyoming, following recommendations from the Yellowstone Ecosystem Subcommittee and the IGBST, launched the Bear Wise Community Effort. The focus is to minimize human/bear conflicts, minimize human-caused bear mortalities associated with conflicts, and safeguard the human community. Results of these efforts are detailed in Appendix D. The annual reports of the IGBST summarize annual data collection. Because additional information can be obtained after publication, data summaries are subject to change. For that reason, data analyses and summaries presented in this report supersede all previously published data. The study area and sampling techniques are reported by Blanchard (1985), Mattson et al. (1991 a), and Haroldson et al. (1998).

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming↗

USGS1995

[Book review] The Eastern Screech Owl: Life History, Ecology and Behavior in the Suburbs and Countryside, by Frederick Gehlback

Review of: Eastern Screech Owl: Life History, Ecology, and Behavior in the Suburbs and Countryside. Frederick R. Gehlbach. Issue 16; Issue 2008 of W. L. Moody Jr. Natural History Series. Texas A&M University Press; 1st edition (November 1994). ISBN: 0890966095. For ornithologists and ecologists alike, Fred Gehlbach's book promises to hold both interest and information value as a comprehensive study of the eastern screech owl (Otus asio hasbroucki). Gehlbach was intrigued with screech owls as a boy and encouraged as an undergraduate by William Hamilton, who underscored that in-depth studies of familiar backyard species can be as fascinating as those in exotic sites. Correspondence with another owl-aficionado, the late H. N. Southern, inspired the author's long-term study of screech owls in a woodland landscape in central Texas and led him to provide nest boxes to enhance his access and sample size. This book is based on observations over a 25-year period-beginning in 1967, with intensive study during an 11-year period (1976-1987) in Texas south of Waco, where Gehlbach teaches at Baylor University. The study represents observations on 659 screech owls, covering several generations of birds and entire lives of many individuals. Gehlbach compares screech owl nesting behavior in a rural versus suburban setting and includes chapters on food supplies and predation tactics; egg-laying, incubation, and parental behavior; vocalizations; and population structure and flux. He discusses why screech owls are widespread across the eastern half of North America and why they succeed among people in suburban environments, where they adapt as easily to mailboxes and porch columns as to natural tree cavities. The book mixes two approaches: on the one hand the dense style of a technical book in which the professional biologist can find information on many aspects of screech owl behavior, life history, and population, including tables, figures, summary statistics, results of statistical comparisons, and experimental tests of hypotheses. On the other hand, each chapter begins with and includes vivid visual images, personal experiences, and thoughtful reflections to draw in the general reader, bridging the interesting topic to the technical details and making the information accessible to a wider audience. The reader is impressed with Dr. Gehlbach's love of his subject, his devotion to long-term study, and his care in presenting the work to his fellow ornithologists, ecologists, and all those interested in wildlife and conservation. It will be a useful reference because of its wealth of information on all aspects of screech owl life history. It is well documented and, in addition to its 10 chapters, includes 10 appendices with information on types of food supplies, bird species that mob screech owls, a daily chronology of nestling development, and a selection of edited field notes to provide background for each chapter. The book is thoroughly referenced and indexed. The Eastern Screech Owl will be read with interest by those with an interest in long-term, in-depth studies and those who love charming stories about remarkable birds with strong personalities and interesting behavior.

Wildlife Review↗

USGS2022

Assessment of a habitat equivalency analysis for freshwater mussels in the upper Mississippi River

The upper Mississippi River (UMR) contains diverse, dense, and reproducing assemblages of native freshwater mussels. In the case of an injury to mussels and their habitats, such as a hazardous material spill, train derailment, or barge grounding, resource managers have few restoration strategies. Resource managers need a means to document, quantify, and mitigate adverse effects on mussels resulting from injury. Habitat equivalency analysis (HEA), developed for use with a wide variety of habitat types, is a restoration scaling technique that compares ecological services lost from injury to ecological services gained through restoration actions. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Iowa Department of Natural Resources modified the HEA for use with native mussels. The mussel HEA has been applied within the UMR to estimate the quantity of restoration needed to compensate the public for injuries to mussels due to contaminant spills and construction projects. Our objective was to describe the UMR HEA for a general audience and assess if the four biological input variables used in the mussel HEA were reasonable based on literature values. We also evaluated the performance of HEA under a range of input scenarios. Although the input estimates used in HEA were within ranges reported in the peer-reviewed literature or were supported by professional judgment in the absence of peer-reviewed literature, outcomes of the mussel HEA were highly variable and would benefit from additional research to reduce uncertainty in the biological inputs. The application of HEA to mussels provides resource managers with a tool to quantify mussel-related ecological services lost from injury and to guide restoration efforts in the UMR.

Freshwater Mollusk Biology and Conservation↗

USGS2021

U.S. Geological Survey science for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative—2018 annual report

The Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative (WLCI) was established in 2007 as a collaborative interagency partnership to develop and implement science-based conservation actions. During the past 11 years, partners from U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), State and Federal land management agencies, universities, and the public have collaborated to implement a long-term (more than 10 years) science-based program that assesses and enhances the quality and quantity of wildlife habitats in the southwest Wyoming region while facilitating responsible development. The USGS WLCI Science Team completes scientific research and develops tools that inform and support WLCI partner planning, decision making, and on-the-ground management actions. In fiscal year 2018, the USGS initiated 3 new projects and continued efforts on 21 ongoing science and web-development projects. The first new project was initiated to support Secretarial Order 3362 which calls on the USGS to assist Western States in mapping big-game migration corridors and developing new mapping tools. During 2018, the USGS hosted a workshop in Laramie, Wyoming, which included more than 70 State and Federal wildlife experts from Colorado, New Mexico, Texas, and Wyoming. Most of the mapping and migration tool curricula used in the workshop were derived from prior WLCI studies and mapping efforts of big-game migration movement in habitats undergoing large-scale energy development. The second new project was in response for WLCI partners to better understand sedimentation and hydrogeomorphic processes in a cold-desert headwater and the third new project was designed to improve our approach for people to access, manage, and analyze WLCI data and WLCI resource information. The USGS published 18 products (including peer-reviewed journal articles, USGS series publications, and data releases) and provided more than a dozen professional oral and poster presentations at scientific meetings and numerous informal presentations to WLCI partners at meetings and workshops. This report summarizes the objectives and status of each project and highlights the USGS 2018 accomplishments and products.

Wyoming↗

USGS1999

A geographic analysis of the status of mountain lions in Oklahoma

The geographic distribution of sightings and sign of mountain lions (Puma concolor) in Oklahoma was investigated. Mail survey questionnaires were sent to natural resource professionals throughout Oklahoma to gather temporal and spatial information on sightings of mountain lions from 1985 to 1995. We used a geographic information system (GIS) to compare locations of sightings and sign in the state with ecoregions, deer harvest, human population densities, locations of licensed owners and breeders of mountain lions, and generalized topography. Sightings and sign of mountain lions occurred significantly more often in the Central Rolling Red Plains than elsewhere in the state. Sightings of mountain lions increased with total deer harvest statewide (R2=0.828, P<0.001). Numbers of sightings of mountain lions were correlated negatively with density of the human population (R2=0.885, P=0.017). Surveys are a valuable method to assess the status of rare wildlife species when other methods are not available and when those receiving the survey are qualified.

Wildlife Society Bulletin↗

USGS2011

Watershed morphology of highland and mountain ecoregions in eastern Oklahoma

The fluvial system represents a nested hierarchy that reflects the relationship among different spatial and temporal scales. Within the hierarchy, larger scale variables influence the characteristics of the next lower nested scale. Ecoregions represent one of the largest scales in the fluvial hierarchy and are defined by recurring patterns of geology, climate, land use, soils, and potential natural vegetation. Watersheds, the next largest scale, are often nested into a single ecoregion and therefore have properties that are indicative of a given ecoregion. Differences in watershed morphology (relief, drainage density, circularity ratio, relief ratio, and ruggedness number) were evaluated among three ecoregions in eastern Oklahoma: Ozark Highlands, Boston Mountains, and Ouachita Mountains. These ecoregions were selected because of their high-quality stream resources and diverse aquatic communities and are of special management interest to the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation. One hundred thirty-four watersheds in first- through fourth-order streams were compared. Using a nonparametric, two-factor analysis of variance (α= 0.05) we concluded that the relief, drainage density, relief ratio, and ruggedness number all changed among ecoregion and stream order, whereas circularity ratio only changed with stream order. Our study shows that ecoregions can be used as a broad-scale framework for watershed management.

Oklahoma↗

USGS2011

Constraints to connecting children with nature--Survey of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service employees sponsored by the National Conservation Training Center, Division of Education Outreach

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) names "connecting people with nature" as one of its top six priorities in the online Service Employee Pocket Guide. The National Conservation Training Center (NCTC) took the initiative to identify issues that impede greater progress in addressing constraints to connecting children with nature. The Division of Education Outreach at NCTC formed a working relation with the Policy Analysis and Science Assistance branch of the U.S. Geological Survey to conduct a study on these issues. To meet the objectives of the study, a survey of a sample of FWS employees was conducted. This report includes the description of how the survey was developed and administered, how the data were analyzed, and a discussion of the survey results. The survey was developed based on published literature and incorporated input from two working groups of professionals focused on the issue of connecting children with nature. Although the objective as stated by the FWS is to connect people with nature, the survey primarily focused on connecting children, rather than all people, with nature. The four primary concepts included on the survey were interpretation of how the FWS defined "connection" as part of its mission, perceived success with outreach, constraints to connecting children with nature, and importance of connecting children with nature. The survey was conducted online using KeySurvey© software. The survey was sent to 604 FWS employees. Responses were received from 320 employees. The respondents represented diversity in regions, tenure, wage/grade level, job series, supervisory status, and involvement with education and outreach activities. The key findings of the survey are as follows: * FWS employees believe they as individuals and the agency are successful now and will be more successful in the future in connecting children with nature. * FWS employees believe that there are many outcomes that are relevant to the FWS objective to connect people with the environment. * FWS employees believe that connecting children with nature is important. * Constraints to connecting children with nature exist but are not perceived by respondents to be severe. * The constraints of greatest concern are practical issues, competition from technology, funding issues and staffing issues.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2008

Ecosystem Services Derived from Wetland Conservation Practices in the United States Prairie Pothole Region with an Emphasis on the U.S. Department of Agriculture Conservation Reserve and Wetlands Reserve Programs

Implementation of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) and Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP) has resulted in the restoration of approximately 2,200,000 ha (5,436,200 acres) of wetland and grassland habitats in the Prairie Pothole Region. These restored habitats are known to provide various ecosystem services; however, little work has been conducted to quantify and verify benefits on program lands (lands enrolled in the CRP and WRP) in agriculturally dominated landscapes of the Prairie Pothole Region. To address this need, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in collaboration with the USDA Farm Service Agency and Natural Resources Conservation Service, initiated a study to develop and apply approaches to quantify changes in ecosystem services resulting from wetland restoration activities funded by the USDA. To accomplish this goal, the USGS conducted a comprehensive, stratified survey of 204 catchments (wetland and surrounding uplands contributing runoff to the wetland) in 1997 and 270 catchments in 2004 to gather data necessary for estimating various ecosystem services. In 1997 and 2004, the surveys included catchments with seasonal and semipermanent wetlands that were restored as part of USDA conservation programs, as well as nonprogram catchments in native prairie. Additionally, in 2004 data collection was expanded to include temporary wetlands for all treatments and nonprogram cropped catchments for all wetland classes: temporary, seasonal, and semipermanent. A key element in the sample design is that catchments span an alteration gradient ranging from highly altered, such as cropland, to minimally altered, such as native prairie. Therefore, we evaluated restoration programs by comparing changes in program (restored) catchments to nonprogram (cropland and native prairie) catchments. Information collected during both surveys included easily measured soil, vegetation, and morphological variables that were used to estimate the following ecosystem services: plant community quality and richness, carbon sequestration, floodwater storage, sediment and nutrient reduction, and potential wildlife habitat suitability. In this report, we evaluate the extent that these ecosystem services changed in restored wetlands relative to cropland and native prairie baselines. In most cases, our results indicate restoration activities funded by the USDA have positively influenced ecosystem services in comparison to a cropped wetland baseline; however, most benefits were only considered at a site-specific scale, and better quantification of off-site benefits associated with conservation programs will require detailed spatial data on all land areas enrolled in conservation programs.

Professional Paper↗

USGS2007

Integrated geoscience studies in the Greater Yellowstone Area - Volcanic, tectonic, and hydrothermal processes in the Yellowstone geoecosystem

Yellowstone National Park, rimmed by a crescent of older mountainous terrain, has at its core the Quaternary Yellowstone Plateau, an undulating landscape shaped by forces of volcanism, tectonism, and later glaciation. Its spectacular hydrothermal systems cap this landscape. From 1997 through 2003, the United States Geological Survey Mineral Resources Program conducted a multidisciplinary project of Yellowstone National Park entitled Integrated Geoscience Studies of the Greater Yellowstone Area, building on a 130-year foundation of extensive field studies (including the Hayden survey of 1871, the Hague surveys of the 1880s through 1896, the studies of Iddings, Allen, and Day during the 1920s, and NASA-supported studies starting in the 1970s—now summarized in USGS Professional Paper 729 A through G) in this geologically dynamic terrain. The project applied a broad range of scientific disciplines and state-of-the-art technologies targeted to improve stewardship of the unique natural resources of Yellowstone and enable the National Park Service to effectively manage resources, protect park visitors from geologic hazards, and better educate the public on geologic processes and resources. This project combined a variety of data sets in characterizing the surficial and subsurface chemistry, mineralogy, geology, geophysics, and hydrothermal systems in various parts of the park. The sixteen chapters presented herein in USGS Professional Paper 1717, Integrated Geoscience Studies in the Greater Yellowstone Area—Volcanic, Tectonic, and Hydrothermal Processes in the Yellowstone Geoecosystem , can be divided into four major topical areas: (1) geologic studies, (2) Yellowstone Lake studies, (3) geochemical studies, and (4) geophysical studies. The geologic studies include a paper by Ken Pierce and others on the influence of the Yellowstone hotspot on landscape formation, the ecological effects of the hotspot, and the human experience and human geography of the greater Yellowstone ecosystem as influenced by the Yellowstone hotspot. Another paper by Paul Carrara describes the recent movement of a large landslide block dated by tree-ring analyses in the Tower Falls area. The section under Yellowstone Lake studies begins with a classic paper by J. David Love and others on ancestral Lake Yellowstone. Other papers in this section include results and interpretation of the high-resolution bathymetric, seismic reflection, and submersible studies by Lisa Morgan and others. Ken Pierce and others describe results from their studies of shorelines along Yellowstone Lake and their interpretation of inflation-deflation cycles, tilting, and faulting in the Yellowstone caldera. The influence of sublacustrine hydrothermal vent fluids on the geochemistry of Yellowstone Lake is described by Laurie Balistrieri and others. In Pat Shanks and others’ chapter, hydrothermal reactions, stable-isotope systematics, sinter deposition, and spire formation are related to the geochemistry of sublacustrine hydrothermal deposits in Yellowstone Lake. The geochemical studies section considers park-wide geochemical systems in Yellowstone National Park. In Bob Rye and Alfred Truesdell’s paper, the question of recharge to the deep thermal reservoir underlying the geysers and hot springs of Yellowstone National Park is discussed. Irving Friedman and Dan Norton report on the chloride flux emissions from Yellowstone in their paper questioning whether Yellowstone is losing its steam. Wildlife issues as addressed by examining trace-element and stable-isotope geochemistry are discussed in a chapter by Maurice Chaffee and others. In another chapter by Chaffee and others, natural and anthropogenic anomalies and their potential impact on the environment using geochemistry is reported. Pam Gemery-Hill and others present geochemical data for selected rivers, lake waters, hydrothermal vents, and subaerial geysers for the time interval of 1996–2004. The life cycle of gold deposits near the northeast corner of the park is discussed by Brad Van Gosen. Under the geophysical studies segment, Ray Kokaly and others use AVIRIS (Airborne Visible and Infrared Spectroscopy) data to map vegetation cover and microbial communities in Yellowstone National Park. Eric Livo and others report their results using AVIRIS data on hydrothermally altered rock and hot-spring deposits. In his final paper following a half century of scientific research, Irving Friedman presents data on monitoring changes in geothermal activity at Norris Geyser Basin using satellite telemetry. These papers summarize a near-decade-long effort by the USGS from the late 1990s to mid-2000s. In 2001, the USGS in cooperation with the National Park Service (Yellowstone National Park) and the University of Utah established the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory, the 5th volcano observatory in the United States.

Professional Paper↗

USGS2010

Mercury in Indiana watersheds: Retrospective for 2001–2006

Information about total mercury and methylmercury concentrations in water samples and mercury concentrations in fish-tissue samples was summarized for 26 watersheds in Indiana that drain most of the land area of the State. Mercury levels were interpreted with information on streamflow, atmospheric mercury deposition, mercury emissions to the atmosphere, mercury in wastewater, and landscape characteristics. Unfiltered total mercury concentrations in 411 water samples from streams in the 26 watersheds had a median of 2.32 nanograms per liter (ng/L) and a maximum of 28.2 ng/L. When these concentrations were compared to Indiana water-quality criteria for mercury, 5.4 percent exceeded the 12-ng/L chronic-aquatic criterion, 59 percent exceeded the 1.8-ng/L Great Lakes human-health criterion, and 72.5 percent exceeded the 1.3-ng/L Great Lakes wildlife criterion. Mercury concentrations in water were related to streamflow, and the highest mercury concentrations were associated with the highest streamflows. On average, 67 percent of total mercury in streams was in a particulate form, and particulate mercury concentrations were significantly lower downstream from dams than at monitoring stations not affected by dams. Methylmercury is the organic fraction of total mercury and is the form of mercury that accumulates and magnifies in food chains. It is made from inorganic mercury by natural processes under specific conditions. Unfiltered methylmercury concentrations in 411 water samples had a median of 0.10 ng/L and a maximum of 0.66 ng/L. Methylmercury was a median 3.7 percent and maximum 64.8 percent of the total mercury in 252 samples for which methylmercury was reported. The percentages of methylmercury in water samples were significantly higher downstream from dams than at other monitoring stations. Nearly all of the total mercury detected in fish tissue was assumed to be methylmercury. Fish-tissue samples from the 26 watersheds had wet-weight mercury concentrations that exceeded the 0.3 milligram per kilogram (mg/kg) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) methylmercury criterion in 12.4 percent of the 1,731 samples. The median wet-weight concentration in the fish-tissue samples was 0.13 mg/kg, and the maximum was 1.07 mg/kg. A coarse-scale analysis of all fish-tissue data in each watershed and a fine-scale analysis of data within 5 kilometers (km) of the downstream end of each watershed showed similar results overall. Mercury concentrations in fish-tissue samples were highest in the White River watershed in southern Indiana and the Fall Creek watershed in central Indiana. In fish-tissue samples within 5 km of the downstream end of a watershed, the USEPA methylmercury criterion was exceeded by 45 percent of mercury concentrations from the White River watershed and 40 percent of the mercury concentration from the Fall Creek watershed. A clear relation between mercury concentrations in fish-tissue samples and methylmercury concentrations in water was not observed in the data from watersheds in Indiana. Average annual atmospheric mercury wet-deposition rates were mapped with data at 156 locations in Indiana and four surrounding states for 2001–2006. These maps revealed an area in southeastern Indiana with high mercury wet-deposition rates—from 15 to 19 micrograms per square meter per year (µg/m 2 /yr). Annual atmospheric mercury dry-deposition rates were estimated with an inferential method by using concentrations of mercury species in air samples at three locations in Indiana. Mercury dry deposition-rates were 5.6 to 13.6 µg/m 2 /yr and were 0.49 to 1.4 times mercury wet-deposition rates. Total mercury concentrations were detected in 96 percent of 402 samples of wastewater effluent from 50 publicly owned treatment works in the watersheds; the median concentration was 3.0 ng/L, and the maximum was 88 ng/L. When these concentrations were compared to Indiana water-quality criteria for mercury, 12 percent exceeded the 12-ng/L chronic-aquatic criterion, 68 percent exceeded the 1.8-ng/L Great Lakes human-health criterion, and 81 percent exceeded the 1.3-ng/L Great Lakes wildlife criterion. Annual stream mercury yields were calculated with a model by using the mercury concentrations in water samples and daily average streamflows for 2002–2006, normalized to the watershed drainage areas. The average annual total mercury stream yields ranged from 0.73 to 45.2 µg/m 2 /yr and were highest in two White River watersheds in central Indiana. Median methylmercury stream yield was 1.9 percent of the median total mercury stream yield. In most watersheds, average annual stream yields of total mercury were a fraction of the combined average annual atmospheric mercury wet-deposition and estimated annual dry-deposition loading rates, indicating that much of the stream mercury was attributable to atmospheric deposition. In two watersheds, average annual stream yields of total mercury were approximately twice the atmospheric mercury loading, indicating that some of the stream mercury apparently was not attributable to atmospheric deposition. Rather, some of the stream mercury yield potentially was contributed by mercury in wastewater discharges. Land-cover type corresponded with the mercury levels in three watersheds: (1) A watershed of the White River in central Indiana with a high percentage of urban land cover had some of the highest total mercury concentrations and stream mercury yields. The urban land cover and numerous permitted wastewater outfalls with mercury in treated effluent potentially contributed mercury to this watershed. (2) A monitoring station on the Maumee River in northeastern Indiana, downstream from a large area of urban land cover, recorded the highest stream mercury concentrations. The urban land cover and mercury detected in treated effluent potentially contributed to the high mercury concentrations at this station. (3) A watershed of the Patoka River in southern Indiana with a high percentage of forest land cover had the highest atmospheric mercury dry-deposition rate. The high dry-deposition rate from the forest land cover potentially contributed to the high mercury concentrations in this watershed. From a retrospective view, mercury concentrations in Indiana watersheds routinely exceeded criteria protective of humans and commonly exceeded criteria protective of wildlife. Atmospheric mercury wet deposition was a predominant factor, but not the single factor, affecting mercury in Indiana watersheds. Mercury in wastewater discharges and atmospheric mercury dry deposition apparently contributed a substantial part of the mercury yield from some watersheds. Dams and impoundments increased the percentage of methylmercury in downstream waters. Long-term monitoring of mercury in wet and dry atmospheric deposition, and in streams and reservoirs, coordinated with monitoring of mercury in fish, will be needed to detect whether mercury levels in Indiana watersheds change in the future.

Indiana↗