Results for “National Geographic” — Page 9

USGS2018

Measuring and evaluating ecological flows from streams to regions: Steps towards national coverage

Living aquatic communities are largely determined and maintained by the volume and quality of flowing waters, both within lotic systems and in receiving waters of coastal systems. However, flow is one of the most frequently and extensively altered features of rivers and streams; alteration effects are likely to be exacerbated by climate change. Lotic systems vary and different fish species need different environmental conditions, and distinct problems are evident at various spatial scales. New synoptic flow and biological information now make it possible to evaluate the effects of altered flows throughout the Great Lakes Region at scales from the stream reach to the Region. We used estimates of river and streamflow and observed fish abundances to develop tools that specify the response of fish to alterations in those flows. We fit the logistic model to a cumulative fish abundance curve as a function of yield providing an empirical means to develop models of the response of cumulative fish abundance to flows. Response zones of yield for each species in each system type (based on size and thermal class) illustrate how criteria may be developed that can be used in decision‐making for management of flows. In our example application, we evaluate both the general response of brook trout ( Salvelinus fontinalis ) abundances (and fish diversity) to changes in flows and assess the sensitivity of each stream fish community to flow alteration. Mapping stream sensitivity to flow alteration throughout the US Great Lakes Region with a multiscale spatial framework showed how regional variability in sensitivity for any fish species or assemblage may be evaluated and provides managers with information to help determine where the best opportunities for protection or restoration of streamflows and associated communities exist. These results provide valuable tools and critical information to managers responsible for balancing water uses and maintaining high quality lotic ecosystems. These methods may be applied to any geographic region and can be extended nationally or globally, where flow, temperature, fish and landscape data are available.

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, ↗

USGS2007

A Comparison of Natural and Urban Characteristics and the Development of Urban Intensity Indices Across Six Geographic Settings

As part of the U.S. Geological Survey National Water-Quality Assessment Program, the effects of urbanization on stream ecosystems have been intensively investigated in six metropolitan areas in the United States. Approximately 30 watersheds in each area, ranging in size from 4 to 560 square kilometers (median is 50 square kilometers), and spanning a development gradient from very low to very high urbanization, were examined near Atlanta, Georgia; Raleigh, North Carolina; Denver, Colorado; Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas; Portland, Oregon; and Milwaukee-Green Bay, Wisconsin. These six studies are a continuation of three previous studies in Boston, Massachusetts; Birmingham, Alabama; and Salt Lake City, Utah. In each study, geographic information system data for approximately 300 variables were assembled to (a) characterize the environmental settings of the areas and (b) establish a consistent multimetric urban intensity index based on locally important land-cover, infrastructure, and socioeconomic variables. This paper describes the key features of urbanization and the urban intensity index for the study watersheds within each area, how they differ across study areas, and the relation between the environmental setting and the characteristics of urbanization. A number of features of urbanization were identified that correlated very strongly to population density in every study area. Of these, road density had the least variability across diverse geographic settings and most closely matched the multimetric nature of the urban intensity index. A common urban intensity index was derived that ranks watersheds across all six study areas. Differences in local natural settings and urban geography were challenging in (a) identifying consistent urban gradients in individual study areas and (b) creating a common urban intensity index that matched the site scores of the local urban intensity index in all areas. It is intended that the descriptions of the similarities and differences in urbanization and environmental settings across these study areas will provide a foundation for understanding and interpreting the effects of urbanization on stream ecosystems in the studies being conducted as part of the National Water-Quality Assessment Program.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2011

The Regionalization of National-Scale SPARROW Models for Stream Nutrients

This analysis modifies the parsimonious specification of recently published total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) national‐scale SPAtially Referenced Regressions On Watershed attributes models to allow each model coefficient to vary geographically among three major river basins of the conterminous United States. Regionalization of the national models reduces the standard errors in the prediction of TN and TP loads, expressed as a percentage of the predicted load, by about 6 and 7%. We develop and apply a method for combining national‐scale and regional‐scale information to estimate a hybrid model that imposes cross‐region constraints that limit regional variation in model coefficients, effectively reducing the number of free model parameters as compared to a collection of independent regional models. The hybrid TN and TP regional models have improved model fit relative to the respective national models, reducing the standard error in the prediction of loads, expressed as a percentage of load, by about 5 and 4%. Only 19% of the TN hybrid model coefficients and just 2% of the TP hybrid model coefficients show evidence of substantial regional specificity (more than ±100% deviation from the national model estimate). The hybrid models have much greater precision in the estimated coefficients than do the unconstrained regional models, demonstrating the efficacy of pooling information across regions to improve regional models.

Journal of the American Water Resources Associatio↗

USGS1964

Geographic data from space

Space science has been called “the collection of scientific problems to which space vehicles can make some specific contributions not achievable by ground-based experiments.” Geography, the most spatial of the sciences, has now been marked as one of these “space sciences.” The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is sponsoring an investigation to identify the Potential geographic benefits from the nation’s space program. This is part of NASA’s long-range inquiry to determine the kinds of scientific activities which might profitably be carried out on future space missions. Among such future activities which are now being planned by NASA are a series of manned earth orbital missions, many of which would be devoted to research. Experiments in physics, astronomy, geophysics, meteorology, and biology are being discussed for these long-range missions. The question which is being put to geographers is, essentially, what would it mean to geographic research to have an observation satellite (or many such satellites) orbiting the earth, gathering data about earth-surface features and environments?

Professional Geographer↗

USGS2014

Standardized phenology monitoring methods to track plant and animal activity for science and resource management applications

Phenology offers critical insights into the responses of species to climate change; shifts in species’ phenologies can result in disruptions to the ecosystem processes and services upon which human livelihood depends. To better detect such shifts, scientists need long-term phenological records covering many taxa and across a broad geographic distribution. To date, phenological observation efforts across the USA have been geographically limited and have used different methods, making comparisons across sites and species difficult. To facilitate coordinated cross-site, cross-species, and geographically extensive phenological monitoring across the nation, the USA National Phenology Network has developed in situ monitoring protocols standardized across taxonomic groups and ecosystem types for terrestrial, freshwater, and marine plant and animal taxa. The protocols include elements that allow enhanced detection and description of phenological responses, including assessment of phenological “status”, or the ability to track presence–absence of a particular phenophase, as well as standards for documenting the degree to which phenological activity is expressed in terms of intensity or abundance. Data collected by this method can be integrated with historical phenology data sets, enabling the development of databases for spatial and temporal assessment of changes in status and trends of disparate organisms. To build a common, spatially, and temporally extensive multi-taxa phenological data set available for a variety of research and science applications, we encourage scientists, resources managers, and others conducting ecological monitoring or research to consider utilization of these standardized protocols for tracking the seasonal activity of plants and animals.

International Journal of Biometeorology↗

USGS1991

National Atlas maps

The National Atlas of the United States of America was published by the U.S. Geological Survey in 1970. Its 765 maps and charts are on 335 14- by 19-inch pages. Many of the maps span facing pages. It's worth a quick trip to the library just to leaf through all 335 pages of this book. Rapid scanning of its thematic maps yields rich insights to the geography of issues of continuing national interest. On most maps, the geographic patterns are still valid, though the data are not current. The atlas is out of print, but many of its maps can be purchased separately. Maps that span facing pages in the atlas are printed on one sheet. The maps dated after 1970 are either revisions of original atlas maps, or new maps published in atlas format. The titles of the separate maps are listed here.

Monograph↗

USGS1998

Amphibian malformations

Frog malformations have been reported from 42 states. The broad geographic distribution of these malformations warrants national attention. Scientists at the USGS National Wildlife Health Center in Madison, Wisconsin are studying this problem in an effort to document its scope and to determine the causes of the observed malformations.

General Information Product↗

USGS1989

Authorities and organizations involved with geographic names - 1989: United States, Canada, Mexico

There is a need for accurate and standard geographic names usage in all levels of government, industry, commerce, communications, education, and research. There is also a growing number of organizations in North America that are, fully or partly, involved in the scholarly study of geographic names. This report is a list of official national, State/Provincial, and regional provincial authorities concerned with name standardization, and of organizations involved with the study of geographic names, in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. The appendixes are copies of documents that provide additional information about the organization, policies, procedures, and publications of some of these organizations.

Report↗

USGS2006

FGDC Digital Cartographic Standard for Geologic Map Symbolization (PostScript Implementation)

PLEASE NOTE: This now-approved 'FGDC Digital Cartographic Standard for Geologic Map Symbolization (PostScript Implementation)' officially supercedes its earlier (2000) Public Review Draft version (see 'Earlier Versions of the Standard' below). In August 2006, the Digital Cartographic Standard for Geologic Map Symbolization was officially endorsed by the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) as the national standard for the digital cartographic representation of geologic map features (FGDC Document Number FGDC-STD-013-2006). Presented herein is the PostScript Implementation of the standard, which will enable users to directly apply the symbols in the standard to geologic maps and illustrations prepared in desktop illustration and (or) publishing software. The FGDC Digital Cartographic Standard for Geologic Map Symbolization contains descriptions, examples, cartographic specifications, and notes on usage for a wide variety of symbols that may be used on typical, general-purpose geologic maps and related products such as cross sections. The standard also can be used for different kinds of special-purpose or derivative map products and databases that may be focused on a specific geoscience topic (for example, slope stability) or class of features (for example, a fault map). The standard is scale-independent, meaning that the symbols are appropriate for use with geologic mapping compiled or published at any scale. It will be useful to anyone who either produces or uses geologic map information, whether in analog or digital form. Please be aware that this standard is not intended to be used inflexibly or in a manner that will limit one's ability to communicate the observations and interpretations gained from geologic mapping. In certain situations, a symbol or its usage might need to be modified in order to better represent a particular feature on a geologic map or cross section. This standard allows the use of any symbol that doesn't conflict with others in the standard, provided that it is clearly explained on the map and in the database. In addition, modifying the size, color, and (or) lineweight of an existing symbol to suit the needs of a particular map or output device also is permitted, provided that the modified symbol's appearance is not too similar to another symbol on the map. Be aware, however, that reducing lineweights below .125 mm (.005 inch) may cause symbols to plot incorrectly if output at higher resolutions (1800 dpi or higher). For guidelines on symbol usage, as well as on color design and map labeling, please refer to the standard's introductory text. Also found there are informational sections covering concepts of geologic mapping and some definitions of geologic map features, as well as sections on the newly defined concepts and terminology for the scientific confidence and locational accuracy of geologic map features. More information on both the past development and the future maintenance of the FGDC Digital Cartographic Standard for Geologic Map Symbolization can be found at the FGDC Geologic Data Subcommittee website (http://ngmdb.usgs.gov/fgdc_gds/). Earlier Versions of the Standard

Techniques and Methods↗

USGS2013

Coal fields of the conterminous United States—National Coal Resource Assessment updated version

This map sheet with accompanying Geographic Information System (GIS) project is an update of the existing U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Conterminous U.S. Coal Fields map. This update was compiled using data primarily from the USGS National Coal Resource Assessment (NCRA) and information from other published maps. The five regions examined by NCRA (Eastern, Gulf Coast, Interior, Rocky Mountain, and Northern Great Plains) constituted 93 percent of U.S. coal production at the time of the assessments. The map sheet shows aerial extent, rank, province, name (region and field), and age information, which are also attributes of the GIS project. Due to changing technological and economic constraints for coal usage, along with the potential for geologic carbon dioxide sequestration, this map sheet and the GIS component of this report do not differentiate between potentially minable coal and uneconomic coal. Additional figures on the map sheet show coal formations, current production by State, coal rank definitions, and charts showing historical trends of coal production.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2019

Summary of climatic, geographic, geologic, and available hydrologic data and identification of data gaps for the Black Bear Creek watershed of the Pawnee Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area, Oklahoma

The Pawnee Nation is compiling a comprehensive water-management plan for the Pawnee Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area in north-central Oklahoma. One of the first steps needed in preparing such a plan is a summary and analysis of available hydrologic data and reports that have been published for the area. In phase I of a three-phase, watershed-based approach to summary and analysis of water resources of the Pawnee Nation, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Pawnee Nation and Bureau of Indian Affairs, conducted a literature search and data analysis for the Black Bear Creek watershed within the Pawnee Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area, referred to herein as the “Black Bear Creek study area.” This report summarizes the available data for the Black Bear Creek study area. Climatic, geographic, geologic, water-use, and hydrologic data from previously published reports or databases were collected and analyzed for this report. Because of the limited amount of groundwater-quality data for the study area, a field collection of groundwater levels and water samples was conducted. Sixteen wells were identified, and groundwater levels were measured at each well. Eight wells were sampled, and water properties, major ions, and nutrients were measured. Overall, there are few long-term monitoring stations to help determine trends of surface-water quality, groundwater quality, and groundwater levels across the study area. Establishing and maintaining long-term streamflow, surface-water-quality, groundwater-level, and groundwater-quality monitoring sites would greatly increase the understanding of the water resources in the Black Bear Creek study area. Additionally, water-use estimates would be greatly improved by metering groundwater withdrawals. Establishing hydrologic and water-quality trends and having improved estimates of water use can aid decision makers in the stewardship of the water resources in this area. This report can aid the Pawnee Nation in prioritization of future projects and serve as a background document for the development of a jurisdiction-wide comprehensive water-management plan.

Oklahoma↗

USGS2009

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Western Region: Coastal and Ocean Science

USGS Western Region Coastal and Ocean Science is interdisciplinary, collaborative, and integrates expertise from all USGS Disciplines, and ten of its major Science Centers, in Alaska, Hawai'i, California, Washington, and Oregon. The scientific talent, laboratories, and research vessels in the Western Region and across the Nation, strategically position the USGS to address broad geographic and oceanographic research topics. USGS information products inform resource managers and policy makers who must balance conservation mandates with increasing demands for resources that sustain the Nation's economy. This fact sheet describes but a few examples of the breadth of USGS science conducted in coastal, nearshore, and ocean environments along our Nation's West Coast and Pacific Islands.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2016

National Land Cover Database 2001 (NLCD01)

This 30-meter data set represents land use and land cover for the conterminous United States for the 2001 time period. The data have been arranged into four tiles to facilitate timely display and manipulation within a Geographic Information System (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/nlcd01-partition.jpg). The National Land Cover Data Set for 2001 was produced through a cooperative project conducted by the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC) Consortium. The MRLC Consortium is a partnership of Federal agencies (http://www.mrlc.gov), consisting of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). One of the primary goals of the project is to generate a current, consistent, seamless, and accurate National Land Cover Database (NLCD) circa 2001 for the United States at medium spatial resolution. For a detailed definition and discussion on MRLC and the NLCD 2001 products, refer to Homer and others (2004), (see: http://www.mrlc.gov/mrlc2k.asp). The NLCD 2001 was created by partitioning the United States into mapping zones. A total of 68 mapping zones (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/nlcd01-mappingzones.jpg), were delineated within the conterminous United States based on ecoregion and geographical characteristics, edge-matching features, and the size requirement of Landsat mosaics. Mapping zones encompass the whole or parts of several states. Questions about the NLCD mapping zones can be directed to the NLCD 2001 Land Cover Mapping Team at the USGS/EROS, Sioux Falls, SD (605) 594-6151 or mrlc@usgs.gov.

Data Series↗

USGS2008

National Land Cover Database 2001 (NLCD01) Tile 2, Northeast United States: NLCD01_2

This 30-meter data set represents land use and land cover for the conterminous United States for the 2001 time period. The data have been arranged into four tiles to facilitate timely display and manipulation within a Geographic Information System (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/nlcd01-partition.jpg). The National Land Cover Data Set for 2001 was produced through a cooperative project conducted by the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC) Consortium. The MRLC Consortium is a partnership of Federal agencies (http://www.mrlc.gov), consisting of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). One of the primary goals of the project is to generate a current, consistent, seamless, and accurate National Land Cover Database (NLCD) circa 2001 for the United States at medium spatial resolution. For a detailed definition and discussion on MRLC and the NLCD 2001 products, refer to Homer and others (2004), (see: http://www.mrlc.gov/mrlc2k.asp). The NLCD 2001 was created by partitioning the United States into mapping zones. A total of 68 mapping zones (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/nlcd01-mappingzones.jpg), were delineated within the conterminous United States based on ecoregion and geographical characteristics, edge-matching features, and the size requirement of Landsat mosaics. Mapping zones encompass the whole or parts of several states. Questions about the NLCD mapping zones can be directed to the NLCD 2001 Land Cover Mapping Team at the USGS/EROS, Sioux Falls, SD (605) 594-6151 or mrlc@usgs.gov.

Data Series↗

USGS2008

National Land Cover Database 2001 (NLCD01) Tile 1, Northwest United States: NLCD01_1

This 30-meter data set represents land use and land cover for the conterminous United States for the 2001 time period. The data have been arranged into four tiles to facilitate timely display and manipulation within a Geographic Information System (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/nlcd01-partition.jpg). The National Land Cover Data Set for 2001 was produced through a cooperative project conducted by the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC) Consortium. The MRLC Consortium is a partnership of Federal agencies (http://www.mrlc.gov), consisting of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). One of the primary goals of the project is to generate a current, consistent, seamless, and accurate National Land Cover Database (NLCD) circa 2001 for the United States at medium spatial resolution. For a detailed definition and discussion on MRLC and the NLCD 2001 products, refer to Homer and others (2004), (see: http://www.mrlc.gov/mrlc2k.asp). The NLCD 2001 was created by partitioning the United States into mapping zones. A total of 68 mapping zones (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/nlcd01-mappingzones.jpg), were delineated within the conterminous United States based on ecoregion and geographical characteristics, edge-matching features, and the size requirement of Landsat mosaics. Mapping zones encompass the whole or parts of several states. Questions about the NLCD mapping zones can be directed to the NLCD 2001 Land Cover Mapping Team at the USGS/EROS, Sioux Falls, SD (605) 594-6151 or mrlc@usgs.gov.

Data Series↗

USGS2008

National Land Cover Database 2001 (NLCD01) Tile 4, Southeast United States: NLCD01_4

This 30-meter data set represents land use and land cover for the conterminous United States for the 2001 time period. The data have been arranged into four tiles to facilitate timely display and manipulation within a Geographic Information System (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/nlcd01-partition.jpg). The National Land Cover Data Set for 2001 was produced through a cooperative project conducted by the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC) Consortium. The MRLC Consortium is a partnership of Federal agencies (http://www.mrlc.gov), consisting of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). One of the primary goals of the project is to generate a current, consistent, seamless, and accurate National Land Cover Database (NLCD) circa 2001 for the United States at medium spatial resolution. For a detailed definition and discussion on MRLC and the NLCD 2001 products, refer to Homer and others (2004), (see: http://www.mrlc.gov/mrlc2k.asp). The NLCD 2001 was created by partitioning the United States into mapping zones. A total of 68 mapping zones (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/nlcd01-mappingzones.jpg), were delineated within the conterminous United States based on ecoregion and geographical characteristics, edge-matching features, and the size requirement of Landsat mosaics. Mapping zones encompass the whole or parts of several states. Questions about the NLCD mapping zones can be directed to the NLCD 2001 Land Cover Mapping Team at the USGS/EROS, Sioux Falls, SD (605) 594-6151 or mrlc@usgs.gov.

Data Series↗

USGS2002

Cooperative Topographic Mapping Program

The mission of the Cooperative Topographic Mapping (CTM) Program of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is to provide the Nation with access to current, accurate, and consistent base geographic data and derivative products, including topographic maps. The CTM Program has the lead responsibility to develop, maintain, and make available The National Map.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2000

Surface water data and geographic relation to Tertiary age intrusions and hydrothermal alteration in the Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison National Forests (GMUG) and intervening Bureau of Land Management (BLM) lands

This data set covering the western part of Colorado includes water quality data from eight different sources (points), nine U.S. Geological Survey Digital Raster Graph (DRG) files for topographic bases, a compilation of Tertiary age intrusions (polygons and lines), and two geotiff files showing areas of hydrothermally altered rock. These data were compiled for use with an ongoing mineral resource assessment of theGrand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison National Forests (GMUG) and intervening Bureau of Land Management(BLM) lands. This compilation was assembled to give federal land managers a preliminary view of water within sub-basinal areas, and to show possible relationships to Tertiary age intrusion and areas of hydrothermal alteration.

Open-File Report↗