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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 163 records · Page 9Linked to original sources

USGS2009

Coastal sensitivity to sea level rise— A focus on the Mid-Atlantic Region

This Synthesis and Assessment Product (SAP), developed as part of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program, examines potential effects of sea-level rise from climate change during the twenty-first century, with a focus on the mid-Atlantic coast of the United States. Using scientific literature and policy-related documents, the SAP describes the physical environments; potential changes to coastal environments, wetlands, and vulnerable species; societal impacts and implications of sea-level rise; decisions that may be sensitive to sea-level rise; opportunities for adaptation; and institutional barriers to adaptation. The SAP also outlines the policy context in the mid-Atlantic region and describes the implications of sea-level rise impacts for other regions of the United States. Finally, this SAP discusses ways natural and social science research can improve understanding and prediction of potential impacts to aid planning and decision making. Projections of sea-level rise for the twenty-first century vary widely, ranging from several centimeters to more than a meter. Rising sea level can inundate low areas and increase flooding, coastal erosion, wetland loss, and saltwater intrusion into estuaries and freshwater aquifers. Existing elevation data for the mid-Atlantic United States do not provide the degree of confidence needed for local decision making. Systematic nationwide collection of high-resolution elevation data would improve the ability to conduct detailed assessments in support of planning. The coastal zone is dynamic and the response of coastal areas to sea-level rise is more complex than simple inundation. Much of the United States consists of coastal environments and landforms such as barrier islands and wetlands that will respond to sea-level rise by changing shape, size, or position. The combined effects of sea-level rise and other climate change factors such as storms may cause rapid and irreversible coastal change. All these changes will affect coastal habitats and species. Increasing population and development in coastal areas also affects the ability of natural ecosystems to adjust to sea-level rise. Coastal communities and property owners have responded to coastal hazards by erecting shore protection structures, elevating land and buildings, or relocating inland. Accelerated sea-level rise would increase the costs and environmental impacts of these responses. Shoreline armoring can eliminate the land along the shore to which the public has access; beach nourishment projects often increase access to the shore. Preparing for sea-level rise can be justified in many cases, because the cost of preparing now is small compared to the cost of reacting later. Examples include wetland protection, flood insurance, longlived infrastructure, and coastal land-use planning. Nevertheless, preparing for sea-level rise has been the exception rather than the rule. Most coastal institutions were based on the implicit assumption that sea level and shorelines are stable. Efforts to plan for sea-level rise can be thwarted by several institutional biases, including government policies that encourage coastal development, flood insurance maps that do not consider sea-level rise, federal policies that prefer shoreline armoring over soft shore protection, and lack of plans delineating which areas would be protected or not as sea level rises. The prospect of accelerated sea-level rise and increased vulnerability in coastal regions underscores the immediate need for improving our scientific understanding of and ability to predict the effects of sea-level rise on natural systems and society. These actions, combined with development of decision support tools for taking adaptive actions and an effective public education program, can lessen the economic and environmental impacts of sea-level rise.

Report↗

USGS2010

Topographic Science

The mission of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center Topographic Science is to establish partnerships and conduct research and applications that facilitate the development and use of integrated national and global topographic datasets. Topographic Science includes a wide range of research and applications that result in improved seamless topographic datasets, advanced elevation technology, data integration and terrain visualization, new and improved elevation derivatives, and development of Web-based tools. In cooperation with our partners, Topographic Science is developing integrated-science applications for mapping, national natural resource initiatives, hazards, and global change science. http://topotools.cr.usgs.gov/.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2026

Debunking the myth of the quintessential resource manager: Precision in actionable science

“Actionable science” is a widely held standard for identifying the merits of natural resources research. Yet, science is often framed as actionable to a vaguely identified quintessential “manager” without defining either the intended manager or use. Generic descriptions lack precision for identifying end users or their needs, limiting methodological rigor in research design and leading to contextual misalignments of outputs with the need they intended to serve. Further, imprecise terminology limits the ability to evaluate impact, replicate efforts, or foster adoption and implementation of findings. This perspective article presents the heuristic of “who, what, when, where, why, how” to help researchers be more precise when describing their actionable science. Through intentional reflection, researchers can move beyond generic framings of “managers” representing monolithic organizations. “Managers” become individuals, with unique responsibilities, functions, worldviews, and levels of authority, all influencing their use of and need for scientific information and data.

Conservation Science and Practice↗

USGS2009

Fort Collins Science Center Ecosystem Dynamics Branch

Complex natural resource issues require understanding a web of interactions among ecosystem components that are (1) interdisciplinary, encompassing physical, chemical, and biological processes; (2) spatially complex, involving movements of animals, water, and airborne materials across a range of landscapes and jurisdictions; and (3) temporally complex, occurring over days, weeks, or years, sometimes involving response lags to alteration or exhibiting large natural variation. Scientists in the Ecosystem Dynamics Branch of the U.S. Geological Survey, Fort Collins Science Center, investigate a diversity of these complex natural resource questions at the landscape and systems levels. This Fact Sheet describes the work of the Ecosystems Dynamics Branch, which is focused on energy and land use, climate change and long-term integrated assessments, herbivore-ecosystem interactions, fire and post-fire restoration, and environmental flows and river restoration.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2016

Proceedings of the 12th Biennial Conference of research on the Colorado Plateau

Introduction The Colorado Plateau is a physiographic region that encompasses 330,000 square kilometers in parts of four states in the southwestern United States (Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, and Arizona). Known for its high deserts, the Colorado Plateau also includes isolated mountains, high plateaus, and rugged canyons. Not only is the region topographically diverse, but geologically, biologically, and culturally diverse as well. The landscape is managed by Federal entities including the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service, and the U.S. Forest Service; Tribal nations including the Navajo Nation, Kaibab Paiute, Mountain Ute, Southern Ute, Hopi, Zuni, Hualapai, Havasupai, and White Mountain Apache Tribes; State land and wildlife management agencies; and privately owned holdings, creating complex interactions and management challenges. Population growth, increased tourism to Federal and State lands, and energy development have increased water demands and altered land-use patterns, and these changes have emerged as management challenges facing the people working and living in the region. Climate change, particularly the ongoing drought, has exacerbated the effects of population growth, land-use change, and other stressors such as invasive species. As managers seek solutions to the challenges facing the region’s natural and cultural resources, the Biennial Conference of Science and Management of the Colorado Plateau has become an important venue for exchanging information about emerging management concerns and recent scientific research. Each biennial conference has sought to promote discussion, information sharing, and productive communication among the managers, scientists, students, administrators, tribal representatives, and others who attend the conference with the goal of enhancing the use of the best available science to manage the region’s incomparable natural and cultural resources. The publication and dissemination of a conference proceedings series expands the reach of the conference beyond those people in attendance and creates a record on the research presented. The idea of producing a conference proceedings, and its subsequent publication, first occurred in 1993 following the first biennial conference in 1991. A published volume of contributed papers has followed each subsequent biennial conference, including this volume. The venue for publishing proceedings has changed over the years and has included the National Park Service, the Government Printing Office, the U.S. Geological Survey, and University of Arizona Press. Recently, van Riper and others (2015) published a compilation of the abstracts from the 11 previous conference proceedings. Collectively, the proceedings highlight approximately 25 years of natural- and cultural-resources research, promoting the integration of research with resource management across the Colorado Plateau. This volume is freely downloadable by the public, thereby further expanding the influence of this conference beyond the Colorado Plateau. The 12th Biennial Conference held in Flagstaff, Arizona, from September 16 to 19, 2013, covered a range of topics in the physical, biological, and socio-cultural sciences. The conference was organized and hosted by Northern Arizona University’s ( NAU) Merriam-Powell Center for Environmental Research, the Colorado Plateau Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit, and the U.S. Geological Survey Southwest Biological Science Center. Financial and in-kind support was provided by a wide range of organizations including the U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, Grand Canyon Trust, Colorado Plateau Research Station, and various NAU entities. NAU sponsors include the Landscape Conservation Initiative, School of Forestry, School of Earth Science and Environmental Sustainability, Office of the Provost, and Office of the Vice President of Research. Contributors to these proceedings include researchers and managers from Federal, State, and Tribal governments, universities, private entities, and non-profit organizations. In this regard, this conference has wide-ranging support and participation among private and public entities involved in the science and management of natural resources on the Colorado Plateau.

Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah↗

USGS2019

Complexities, context, and new information about the Elwha River

Recently, Hand et al. (2018) discussed the socio- ecological complexities surround-ing natural resource policy, science, and management in the Columbia River Basin, using a case study of dam removal on the Elwha River in Washington State (WebFigure 1a). We feel compelled to provide additional historical context and correct some of the information provided by Hand et al. about the Elwha. The his-toric removals of the two Elwha River dams – a long- anticipated project that was decades in the making – have been touted by some as an environmental success story following the project’s completion in 2014. As with any complex endeavor, critical analyses and lessons learned continue to emerge, and will likely benefit future projects.

Washington↗

USGS2021

Socio-technical scales in socio-environmental modeling: Managing a system-of-systems modeling approach

System-of-systems approaches for integrated assessments have become prevalent in recent years. Such approaches integrate a variety of models from different disciplines and modeling paradigms to represent a socio-environmental (or social-ecological) system aiming to holistically inform policy and decision-making processes. Central to the system-of-systems approaches is the representation of systems in a multi-tier framework with nested scales. Current modeling paradigms, however, have disciplinary-specific lineage, leading to inconsistencies in the conceptualization and integration of socio-environmental systems. In this paper, a multidisciplinary team of researchers, from engineering, natural and social sciences, have come together to detail socio-technical practices and challenges that arise in the consideration of scale throughout the socio-environmental modeling process. We identify key paths forward, focused on explicit consideration of scale and uncertainty, strengthening interdisciplinary communication, and improvement of the documentation process. We call for a grand vision (and commensurate funding) for holistic system-of-systems research that engages researchers, stakeholders, and policy makers in a multi-tiered process for the co-creation of knowledge and solutions to major socio-environmental problems.

Environmental Modelling and Software↗

USGS2020

Scenarios for valuing sample information in natural resources

Uncertainty is ubiquitous in natural resource systems, science and management. Sample data are obtained in order to reduce uncertainty, thereby increasing knowledge and improving resource management, but sampling always comes at a cost of some sort. Is that cost worthwhile? Analysis of the value of sample information ( VSI ) addresses this question. In this paper we develop the valuation of sample information in terms of five elements: (a) a system whose attributes are the focus of analysis; (b) a range of management actions that affect the system's status; (c) uncertainty about system status or structure, as characterized by initial (prior) probabilities of possible system states or structures; (d) an experiment or other information source that produces new data points and updated (posterior) probabilities; and (e) a value measure that is a function of the management action taken, conditional on either the system state or structure. We describe five scenarios for analysing the VSI under uncertainty about system structure and state. Scenarios 1–3 comprise analyses of conditional, expected and optimal expected values of sample information. They focus primarily on choice of management adaptations with new information. Scenarios 4 and 5 involve pre-selected management actions, and are useful for comparing designs of data collection rather than for choosing a management action. These last scenarios expand the framework for VSI to include actions that have been selected independently of the updating of uncertainty. We discuss other extensions of VSI analysis, which include spatial applications, hybrid scenarios, applications involving dynamic systems, and a focus on costs rather than net benefits. Value of sample information analysis holds promise in emerging areas of ecology such as ecological forecasting and the use of remote sensing in conservation, where potential new data from models and satellites can be evaluated in advance, thereby allowing more efficient prioritization of scientific efforts. More generally, VSI can contribute to better ecological understanding and more effective management in a wide range of ecological situations.

Methods in Ecology and Evolution↗

USGS2018

Monitoring the social benefits of ecological restoration

Ecological restoration has traditionally been evaluated by monitoring the recovery of ecosystem conditions, such as species diversity and abundance, physical form, and water quality, whereas monitoring the social benefits of restoration is uncommon. Current monitoring frameworks do not track who benefits from restoration or by how much. In this study, we investigate how ecological restoration could be monitored to provide indications of progress in terms of social conditions. We provide suggestions for measuring several categories of benefit indicators, including access, beneficiaries, and quality of benefit, using information compiled from natural and social science literature. We also demonstrate how to evaluate ecological and social benefit indicators over time at a site or landscape scale using multi-criteria analysis. We use flood protection and recreation as example benefits to monitor.

Restoration Ecology↗

USGS1993

Understanding our fragile environment; Lessons from geochemical studies

An understanding of our fragile environment can begin with a recognition of the importance of certain elements, commonly called "minerals substances" (such as iron and zinc), in the lives of humans and animals and in the soils that support plants. This recognition is well deserved because these elements are essential for the life or optimum health of an organism. Some elements such as carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, magnesium, potassium, and phosphorus are required in relatively large amounts by organisms. However, others are required in smaller quantities; these are referred to as trace elements. Diseases have been related to the deficiency of about 20 elements in animals and humans and to the deficiency of approximately 13 elements in plants. At the same time, if these and other elements occur in quantities great enough, toxicity can result. An element, or any substance, that occurs in the environment and contains concentrations above what are considered to be background levels may be considered a contaminant. When contaminants occur at levels that are potentially harmful to organisms, they are labeled as hazards. Often the quantitative difference between essential amounts and toxic concentrations of these elements is very small. For example, the trace element selenium is required at a level of no less than 0.4 ppm in the diet of cattle but can be toxic at levels greater than approximately 4ppm. Elements that are required for survival by animals and plants are termed essential, while those not required are nonessential. Trace essential elements such as fluorine, copper, selenium, molybdenum, and others listed in the table on page 1 can be hazardous to life forms if present at high levels. Nonessential heavy metals such as arsenic, lead, mercury, cadmium, and chromium are usually toxic to organisms at much lower levels than trace essential elements. Depending on the association that these nonessential elements may form with natural geologic materials such as organic matter, other elements or minerals, and adsorbers (such as clays), these elements can range from being safe to being extremely toxic. The elemental composition of plants, animals, and humans correlates with the geologic makeup of the Earth, and life has evolved reflecting these natural occurrences. The science of environmental geochemistry examines the interrelationship of life with the physical and chemical Earth.

Circular↗

USGS2002

Abstracts of the annual Planetary Geologic Mappers Meeting, June 18-19, 2001, Albuquerque, New Mexico

The annual Planetary Geologic Mappers Meeting serves two purposes. In addition to giving mappers the opportunity to exchange ideas, experiences, victories, and problems with others, presentations are reviewed by the Geologic Mapping Subcommittee (GeMS) to provide input to the Planetary Geology and Geophysics Mapping Program review panel’s consideration of new proposals and progress reports that include mapping tasks. Funded mappers bring both oral presentation materials (slides or viewgraphs) and map products to post for review by GeMS and fellow mappers. Additionally, the annual meetings typically feature optional field trips offering earth analogs and parallels to planetary mapping problems. The 2001 Mappers Meeting, June 18-19, was convened by Tim Parker, Dave Senske, and Ken Tanaka and was hosted by Larry Crumpler and Jayne Aubele of the New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Oral presentations were given in the Museum’s Honeywell Auditorium, and maps were posted in the Sandia Room. In addition to active mappers, guests included local science teachers who had successfully competed for the right to attend and listen to the reports. It was a unique pleasure for mappers to have the opportunity to interact with and provide information to teachers responding so enthusiastically to the meeting presentation. On Sunday, June 17, Larry and Jayne conducted an optional pre-meeting field trip. The flanks of Rio Grande Rift, east and west of Albuquerque and Valles Caldera north of town presented tectonic, volcanic, and sedimentary examples of the Rift and adjoining areas analogous to observed features on Mars and Venus. The arid but volcanically and tectonically active environment of New Mexico’s rift valley enables focus on features that appear morphologically young and spectacular in satellite images and digital relief models. The theme of the trip was to see what, at orbiter resolution, "obvious" geologic features look like at lander (outcrop) scales. Trips to the top of the rift-flanking mountains (Sandia Peak, 10,600 ft) and the Valles Caldera, as well as various active spring deposits highlighted the day. After welcoming remarks from the host, Larry Crumpler, opening remarks by Tim Parker and Dave Senske and a report on mapping program status by Ken Tanaka, the mappers’ oral presentations began the morning of June 18, with a session on Venus Geologic Mapping. The afternoon continued with an exciting USGS Planetary GIS on the Web (PIGWAD) demonstration and ended with an open discussion of issues in planetary mapping. Posted maps of Venus quadrangles were viewed during the morning break. Tuesday’s Mars Geologic Mapping session began with a pep talk from Tim Parker encouraging mapping community input to the MER landing site selection committee and continued with Steve Saunders describing the potential contribution of Odyssey Mission data to the geologic mapping of Mars. A Mars map poster session was held during the morning break, and the meeting was adjourned mid-afternoon. After the mappers meeting on Tuesday, attendants were treated to a "Field trip to Mars." The Institute of Meteoritics at the University of New Mexico houses an outstanding collection of meteorites, including those that have been identified as originating from Mars. The Institute tour featured examples of most of the different lithologies exhibited by martian meteorites identified to date, as well as some of the analytical tests (scanning electron microscope) they are conducting on specimens from ALH84001. Wednesday, June 20, featured an optional post-meeting field trip to see a travertine quarry and nearby sites of travertine deposition, the Very Large Array near Socorro, and other volcanic features within the Rio Grande Rift.

New Mexico↗

USGS2024

Editorial: Enabling people-centered risk communication for geohazards

In the field of natural hazards, communicating science with the public and stakeholders (i.e., interested parties) involves entering the challenging and complex world of hazard and risk communication, the ultimate purpose of which is to reduce the impact of impending hazards on people and property at risk. Hazard and risk communication are adequate if they reach people with the information that they need, at the right time, and in a form that they can use. This task appears to be particularly difficult when decisions by the public and stakeholders have to be made in the presence of uncertainty about what could happen, as is often the case with geohazards. Moreover, decision-making is complex when there are time pressures, human and economic resources are limited, and multiple sources of information need to be considered. This poses several challenges for the development of two-way and people-centered risk communication for geohazards. The “Enabling People-Centered Risk Communication for Geohazards” Research Topic analyses these challenges and identifies innovative pathways to address them. More precisely, it draws together 13 state-of-the-art articles from around the world on improving communication practices, strategies, and understandings relating to a range of various geohazards and weather-related hazards.

Frontiers in Earth Science↗

USGS2010

Vegetation classification and distribution mapping report: Canyon de Chelly National Monument

Executive Summary: The classification and distribution mapping of the vegetation of Canyon de Chelly National Monument (CACH) and surrounding environment was accomplished through a multi-agency effort between 2003 and 2007. The National Park Service’s Southern Colorado Plateau Network facilitated the team that conducted the work, which comprised the U.S. Geological Survey’s Southwest Biological Science Center and Fort Collins Science Center, Navajo Natural Heritage Program, Northern Arizona University, and NatureServe. The project team described 48 plant communities for CACH—35 of which were described from quantitative classification based on field-relevé data collected in 2004. Five additional plant communities were based on field relevés collected in a previous study. The team derived four additional plant communities from field observations during the photointerpretation phase of the project, and field documented them during accuracy assessment. The National Vegetation Classification Standard served as a conceptual framework for assigning these plant communities to the alliance and association level. Ten of the 48 plant communities were designated “park specials”, that is, plant communities with insufficient data to describe them as new alliances or associations. The project team also developed a spatial vegetation map database representing CACH, with three different map-class schemas: base, group, and management map classes. The base map classes represented the finest level of spatial detail. Photointerpreters delineated initial polygons through manual interpretation of 2003/2004 1:12,000-scale true color aerial photography supplemented by occasional computer screen digitizing on a mosaic of digitized aerial photos. These polygons were labeled with base map classes during photointerpretation. Field visits verified interpretation concepts. The vegetation map database includes • ? 53 base map classes, which consist of associations and park specials classified with the quantitative analysis • ? additional associations noted during photointerpretation • ? non-vegetated land cover, such as infrastructure, land use, and geological land cover. The base map classes consist of 4,718 polygons in the project area. A field-based accuracy assessment of the base map classes showed the overall accuracy to be 50.8% The group map classes represent aggregations of the base map classes, approximating the group level of the National Vegetation Classification Standard, Version 2 (Federal Geographic Data Committee 2008). Terrestrial ecological systems, as described by NatureServe (Comer et al. 2003), were used as a first approximation of the group level. The project team identified 16 group map classes in this project. The overall accuracy of the group map classes was determined using the same accuracy assessment data as for the base map classes. The overall accuracy of the group representation of vegetation was 79.9%. In consultation with park staff, the team developed management map classes that consisted of park-defined groupings of base map classes and were intended to represent a balance between maintaining required accuracy and providing a focus on vegetation of particular interest or import to park managers. The 28 management map classes have an overall accuracy of 77.1%. While the main products of this project are the vegetation classification and the vegetation map database, a number of ancillary geographic information system and digital database products were also produced that can be used independently, or to augment the main products. These products include shapefiles of the location of field-collected data and relational databases of field-collected data.

Report↗

USGS2025

Engineering and risk research—A strategic vision for extending USGS earthquake science to risk assessment and mitigation

As a part of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Natural Hazards Mission Area, the Engineering and Risk Project (ERP) of the Geologic Hazards Science Center conducts civil engineering research to extend natural hazards science to risk assessments. The ERP includes predominantly, but not exclusively, staff funded by the USGS Earthquake Hazards Program. A major focus of the ERP is to deliver actionable information to decisionmakers that helps promote the safety, security, and economic well-being of the Nation. The report discusses briefly the ERP’s evolution and scope, its organization structure, describes key products and deliverables, their efforts to engage with external partners, and its strategy and vision in conducting range of engineering and risk research. The research topics outlined in this report, as developed by the ERP, may be used to facilitate project planning activities during the next 10 years and serve as a longer-term planning resource for the USGS Earthquake Hazards Program and Geologic Hazards Science Center.

Circular↗

USGS2023

Application of the technology readiness levels framework to natural resource management tools

Technology advancements in fisheries science can provide useful tools to support natural resource management and conservation. However, new technologies may also present challenges for decision makers due to the lack of a standardized process to assess technologies for consideration within management plans. Future technology development in fishery and water resources could benefit from a framework that assigns an appropriate technology development stage and defines the readiness for implementation. Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) are one established research and development scale used throughout engineering and related disciplines that could be applied to natural resource management tools. The TRL assess the maturity of a technology from nascent idea through a fully developed technology. Steps within this scale could provide a general framework for researchers to follow when planning and conducting studies, while similarly providing a standard scale for resource managers to assess readiness for technology transfer and implementation. The goal of this paper is to describe TRL in the context of natural resource management tools and offer this existing framework as one option to facilitate communication between researchers and managers.

Fisheries↗

USGS2017

Cross-scale phenological data integration to benefit resource management and monitoring

Climate change is presenting new challenges for natural resource managers charged with maintaining sustainable ecosystems and landscapes. Phenology, a branch of science dealing with seasonal natural phenomena (bird migration or plant flowering in response to weather changes, for example), bridges the gap between the biosphere and the climate system. Phenological processes operate across scales that span orders of magnitude—from leaf to globe and from days to seasons—making phenology ideally suited to multiscale, multiplatform data integration and delivery of information at spatial and temporal scales suitable to inform resource management decisions. A workshop report: Workshop held June 2016 to investigate opportunities and challenges facing multi-scale, multi-platform integration of phenological data to support natural resource management decision-making.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2009

Fort Collins Science Center - Fiscal Year 2008 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 (USGS) Fort Collins Science Center (FORT) contribute a unique blend of ecological, socioeconomic, and technological expertise to investigating complicated ecological problems that address critical management questions. In Fiscal Year 2008 (FY08), FORT's scientific and technical professionals continued research vital to the science and management needs of U.S. Department of the Interior agencies and other entities. This annual report describes select FY08 accomplishments in research and technical assistance involving biological information management and delivery; aquatic, riparian, and managed-river ecosystems; invasive species; status and trends of biological resources (including human dimensions and social science); terrestrial ecosystems; and fish and wildlife resources.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2018

Ecosystems science: Genes to landscapes

Bountiful fisheries, healthy and resilient wildlife, flourishing forests and vibrant grasslands are coveted resources that benefit all Americans. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) science supports the conservation and management of the Nation’s fish and wildlife, and the landscapes they inhabit. Our biological resources—ecosystems and the wild things that live in them—are the foundation of our conservation heritage and an economic asset to current and future generations of Americans. The USGS Ecosystems Mission Area, the biological research arm of the Department of the Interior (DOI), provides science to help America achieve sustainable management and conservation of its biological resources. This work is done within the broader mission of the USGS—to serve the Nation with science that advances understanding of our natural resources, informs land and water stewardship, and helps safeguard communities from natural and environmental hazards. The Ecosystems Mission Area provides research, technical assistance, and education conducted by Cooperative Research Units and Science Centers located in nearly every State. The quality of life and economic strength in America hinges on healthy ecosystems that support living things and natural processes. Ecosystem science better enables society to understand how and why ecosystems change and to guide actions that can prevent damage to, and restore and sustain ecosystems. It is through this knowledge that informed decisions are made about natural resources that can enhance our Nation’s economic and environmental well-being.

Fact Sheet↗