Geology topics

Natasha B. Carr

Publications and source records attributed to Natasha B. Carr.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2021

Compilation of information on occurrence and conservation status for the freshwater mussel fauna of Nebraska, Kansas, and Oklahoma

The purpose of this data series is to compile information on the occurrence and conservation status of the freshwater mussel fauna of Nebraska, Kansas, and Oklahoma and to map the distribution of a freshwater mussel assemblage for the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management Rapid Ecoregional Assessment (REA) program. The six focal species in the freshwater mussel assemblage are Amblema plicata ( threeridge), Fusconaia flava (Wabash pigtoe), Lampsilis cardium (plain pocketbook), Lampsilis teres (yellow sandshell), Pyganodon grandis (giant floater), and Uniomerus tetralasmus (pondhorn). The focal species were selected using the following criteria: (1) the species are regionally significant, (2) occurrence records are sufficient to map the distribution of the species by hydrologic subbasins, (3) the assemblage includes species representing a range of State-level conservation priorities, and (4) the species are not listed as federally endangered or threatened. In addition, the species represent a broad array of life history strategies and habitat associations. A total of 61 native species of freshwater mussels have documented occurrences within at least 1 of the 3 States, including 6 species that appear to have been extirpated from all the States and 6 species that may have been extirpated from at least 1 State. Of the 61 species, 8 species (including 3 potentially extirpated species) are listed as federally threatened or endangered and an additional 5 species are ranked as imperiled or vulnerable across their range. Approximately 80 percent of the native species known to have occurred within the three-State area have a secure conservation status, in comparison to only 40 percent of all freshwater mussel species or subspecies occurring within the United States. The compiled records for the contemporary period (1970–2017) documented the occurrence of 24 extant species in Nebraska, 42 in Kansas, and 48 in Oklahoma. The contemporary distributions of the six focal species were mapped by subbasins and the larger hydrologic subregions. Historical records (prior to 1962) were also mapped but were limited. Amblema plicata , Fusconaia flava , and Lampsilis cardium were present in approximately one-third of all subbasins and slightly more than half of the subregions, primarily along the eastern portion of the three-State area. Lampsilis teres and Uniomerus tetralasmus were more widespread, occurring in close to half of the subbasins and about three-quarters of the subregions. Pyganodon grandis was the most widespread, occurring in about three-quarters of the subbasins and almost all subregions. There were very few subbasins with historical occurrences that lacked contemporary occurrences. The broad-scale distribution maps for the freshwater mussel assemblage presented with this report are intended to contribute baseline information for regional assessments, such as the Southern Great Plains Rapid Ecoregional Assessment. Despite the limitations of the available data, such baseline information can be useful for identifying data gaps, monitoring future trends, identifying conservation priorities, and providing the larger context for more detailed watershed- or catchment-level studies. ScienceBase data release files associated with this data series are available at https://doi.org/10.5066/P9SBFZJU (Fancher and Carr, 2021).

Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma↗

USGS2020

Biological assessment of a proposed vegetation management program to benefit tribes in eastern Oklahoma

Tribal communities may benefit from land management activities that enhance their use of resources on tribal lands. The Bureau of Indian Affairs is implementing a 5-year vegetation management program to provide support for projects that develop and use natural and cultural resources and improve opportunities for agricultural activities to benefit 20 Indian Tribes and Nations in the Eastern Oklahoma Region of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The bureau is working with individual Tribes to identify project objectives and design treatments, which include prescribed burning, timber removal, thinning, and reduction of hazardous fuels. The total action area for the vegetation management program is estimated to be 236,575 acres, representing approximately 1 percent of the region. A biological assessment was prepared, in cooperation with the bureau and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, to evaluate the potential effects of the proposed vegetation management program on 22 federally threatened, endangered, and candidate species that may occur within the Eastern Oklahoma Region. The species evaluated included one plant, two insects, one reptile, five fresh-water mussels, four fishes, five birds, and four bats. Because the proposed treatments will be largely restricted to terrestrial systems, it is expected that there will be no adverse effects on the 15 species associated with aquatic habitats, provided that best management practices are followed. The proposed treatments may affect but are unlikely to adversely affect six of the primarily terrestrial species (the Papaipema eryngii [rattlesnake master borer], Picoides borealis [red-cockaded woodpecker], Myotis grisescens [gray bat], Myotis sodalis [Indiana bat], Myotis septentrionalis [northern long-eared bat], and Corynorhinus townsendii ingens [Ozark big-eared bat]), provided that best management practices are followed, including avoidance of critical habitat features. The only species likely to be adversely affected by the proposed treatments is Nicrophorus americanus (American burying beetle) as a consequence of short-term disturbances to soils and vegetation. Most adverse effects of the treatments (such as soil compaction and decreased cover in the forest understory) are expected to be short term (habitat will recover or be restored within 5 years of treatments). Less than 1 percent of the action area is expected to result in long-term adverse effects to the American burying beetle as a result of permanent cover changes that persist for more than 5 years. It is expected that the primary treatments will be largely beneficial to the American burying beetle population in the region by reducing the risk of high-severity fires and expansion of invasive woody shrubs, such as Juniperus virginiana (eastern redcedar) within potential beetle habitat and the surrounding landscape. Overall, the proposed management program is expected to provide long-term benefits to American burying beetle habitat across 91 percent of the action area.

Oklahoma↗

USGS2020

Quantifying development to inform management of Mojave and Sonoran desert tortoise habitat in the American southwest

Two tortoise species native to the American southwest have experienced significant habitat loss from development and are vulnerable to ongoing threats associated with continued development. Mojave desert tortoises Gopherus agassizii are listed as threatened under the US Endangered Species Act, and Sonoran desert tortoises G. morafkai are protected in Arizona (USA) and Mexico. Substantial habitat for both species occurs on multiple-use public lands, where development associated with traditional and renewable energy production, recreation, and other activities is likely to continue. Our goal was to quantify development to inform and evaluate actions implemented to protect and manage desert tortoise habitat. We quantified a landscape-level index of development across the Mojave and Sonoran desert tortoise ranges using models of potential habitat for each species (152485 total observations). We used 13 years of Mojave desert tortoise monitoring data (4732 observations) to inform the levels and spatial scales at which tortoises may be affected by development. Most (66–70%) desert tortoise habitat has some development within 1 km. Development levels on desert tortoise habitat are lower inside versus outside areas protected by actions at national, state, and local levels, suggesting that protection efforts may be having the desired effects and providing a needed baseline for future effectiveness evaluations. Of the relatively undeveloped desert tortoise habitat, 43% (74030 km2) occurs outside of existing protections. These lands are managed by multiple federal, state, and local entities and private landowners, and may provide opportunities for future land acquisition or protection, including as mitigation for energy development on public lands.

Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah↗

USGS2019

Using scenarios to evaluate vulnerability of grassland communities to climate change in the Southern Great Plains of the United States

Scenario planning is a useful tool for identifying key vulnerabilities of ecological systems to changing climates, informed by the potential outcomes for a set of divergent, plausible, and relevant climate scenarios. We evaluated potential vulnerabilities of grassland communities to changing climate in the Southern Great Plains (SGP) and the Landscape Conservation Design pilot area (LCD) for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Science Applications Program, Great Plains Landscape Conservation Cooperative. Four climate scenarios (warm-dry, warm-wet, hot-dry, and hot-wet) from atmospheric-ocean general circulation models were selected to represent a suite of plausible future climatic conditions. For each scenario, and for contemporary climatic conditions, we predicted the spatial patterns of relative productivity for indicator grass species using statistical models of relative above-ground net primary productivity (hereafter, productivity) based on temperature, precipitation, and soil texture (percent sand, silt, or clay). Two indicator grass species were selected to represent each of four focal grassland communities: semi-desert grasslands, shortgrass prairie, mixed-grass prairie, and tallgrass prairie. Changes in spatial patterning of bioclimatic conditions conducive for each indicator species as predicted for each climate scenario relative to current land use were used to evaluate potential vulnerability and conservation opportunities for grassland communities. Specifically, the following questions were addressed for each focal grassland community: (1) Where is the productivity of each species predicted to increase, decrease, or remain stable relative to estimated contemporary productivity for the SGP and LCD pilot area, (2) where is the productivity of the two indicator species for each community predicted to increase, decrease, or remain stable, (3) which grassland communities are most vulnerable to changes in composition and vertical structure, (4) how do current land-use patterns contribute to potential vulnerabilities of grassland communities for the climate scenarios evaluated, and (5) how can managers use the vulnerabilities identified to evaluate conservation opportunities in the SGP and LCD? Current land-use patterns, in combination with the potential effects of a changing climate, pose greater risks to mixed-grass and tallgrass prairies of the SGP compared to semi-desert grasslands and shortgrass prairie. For most climate scenarios evaluated, bioclimatic conditions conducive to the taller species were predicted to contract within some or all the current distribution of mixed-grass and tallgrass prairies within the SGP. An increase in precipitation, however, could potentially ameliorate the negative effects of increasing temperatures as evidenced by higher productivity for the hot-wet scenario compared to the other scenarios for the most vulnerable species. Compounding their greater vulnerability to increasing temperatures coupled with decreasing precipitation, the mixed-grass and tallgrass prairies have been greatly fragmented and converted, primarily by agriculture. In contrast, the climate scenarios evaluated are generally conducive to stable or increasing productivity of indicator species for semi-desert grasslands and shortgrass prairie. In addition, conversion and fragmentation of semi-desert grasslands and shortgrass prairie were relatively low. These results suggest that the synergistic effects of land use and changing climatic conditions could have the greatest effects on the composition and structure of mixed-grass and tallgrass prairies in the SGP. ScienceBase data release files that support this report are available at https://doi.org/10.5066/P9DGJHEP (Manier and others, 2019).

Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, ↗

USGS2019

Quantifying ecological integrity of terrestrial systems to inform management of multiple-use public lands in the United States

The concept of ecological integrity has been applied widely to management of aquatic systems, but still is considered by many to be too vague and difficult to quantify to be useful for managing terrestrial systems, particularly across broad areas. Extensive public lands in the western United States are managed for diverse uses such as timber harvest, livestock grazing, energy development, and wildlife conservation, some of which may degrade ecological integrity. We propose a method for assessing ecological integrity on multiple-use lands that identifies the components of integrity and levels in the ecological hierarchy where the assessment will focus, and considers existing policies and management objectives. Both natural reference and societally desired environmental conditions are relevant comparison points. We applied the method to evaluate the ecological integrity of shrublands in Nevada, yielding an assessment based on six indicators of ecosystem structure, function, and composition, including resource- and stressor-based indicators measured at multiple scales. Results varied spatially and among indicators. Invasive plant cover and surface development were highest in shrublands in northwest and southeast Nevada. Departure from reference conditions of shrubland area, composition, patch size, and connectivity was highest in central and northern Nevada. Results may inform efforts to control invasive species and restore shrublands on federal lands in Nevada. We suggest that ecological integrity assessments for multiple-use lands be grounded in existing policies and monitoring programs, incorporate resource- and stressor-based metrics, rely on publicly available data collected at multiple spatial scales, and quantify both natural reference and societally desired resource conditions.

Nevada↗

USGS2018

Biophysical assessment for indemnity selection of Federal Lands in Colorado

Information on the biophysical features of Federal lands identified as suitable for transfer to the State of Colorado was requested by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). This information is intended for use in conducting an Environmental Assessment prior to the transfer of ownership (conveyance) to the State. The Colorado State Land Board filed a selective application to obtain public land and mineral estate in lieu of lands to which the State of Colorado was entitled but did not receive at the time of statehood. To address this legal obligation, 339 parcels of Federal lands (organized into 89 indemnity units [IUs]), currently under management by the BLM, have been identified as suitable for transfer to the State. The IUs include 23,130 acres of surface and mineral estate and 6,150 acres of mineral estate only. The specific land parcels to be transferred to the State will be finalized after an Environmental Assessment and other evaluations are completed. To provide the biophysical information necessary for conducting a future Environmental Assessment of the potential effects of the proposed land transfer, information on ecological communities, soil characteristics, and land use was summarized at three levels: (1) all of Colorado, (2) lands under the jurisdiction of the BLM, and (3) the 89 IUs. Information was also synthesized and summarized for 179 plant and animal species or subspecies of management concern to evaluate which species had the potential for occurrence on IUs. Datasets summarized for Colorado and for indemnity units and methodological details for all data summaries are provided in U.S. Geological Survey data releases available online at https://doi.org/10.5066/F7GT5MGV and https://doi.org/10.5066/F7C24VQ0 .

Colorado↗

USGS2018

Southern Great Plains Rapid Ecoregional Assessment—Volume II. Species and assemblages

The Southern Great Plains Rapid Ecoregional Assessment was conducted in partnership with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Great Plains Landscape Conservation Cooperative. The overall goal of the Rapid Ecoregional Assessments (REAs) is to compile and synthesize regional datasets to facilitate evaluation of the cumulative effects of change agents on priority ecological communities and species. In particular, the REAs identify and map the distribution of communities and wildlife habitats at broad spatial extents and provide assessments of ecological conditions. The REAs also identify where and to what degree ecological resources are currently at risk from change agents, such as development, fire, invasive species, and climate change. The REAs can help managers identify and prioritize potential areas for conservation or restoration, assess cumulative effects as required by the National Environmental Policy Act, and inform landscape-level planning and management decisions for multiple uses of public lands. Management questions form the basis for the REA framework and were developed in conjunction with the BLM and other stakeholders. Conservation elements are communities and species that are of regional management concern. Core management questions relate to the key ecological attributes and change agents associated with each conservation element. Integrated management questions synthesize the results of the primary core management questions into overall landscape-level ranks for each conservation element. The ecological communities evaluated as conservation elements are shortgrass, mixed-grass, and sand prairies; all grasslands; riparian and nonplaya wetlands; playa wetlands and saline lakes; and prairie streams and rivers. Species and species assemblages evaluated are the freshwater mussel assemblage, Arkansas River shiner ( Notropis girardi ), ferruginous hawk ( Buteo regalis ), lesser prairie chicken ( Tympanuchus pallidicinctus ), snowy plover ( Charadrius nivosus ), mountain plover ( Charadrius montanus ), long-billed curlew ( Numenius americanus ), interior least tern ( Sternula antillarum athalassos ), burrowing owl ( Athene cunicularia ), black-tailed prairie dog ( Cynomys ludovicianus ), bat assemblage, swift fox ( Vulpes velox ), and mule deer ( Odocoileus hemionus ). The Southern Great Plains REA is summarized in a series of three reports and associated datasets. The pre-assessment report (available online at https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20151003 ) summarizes the process used by the REA stakeholders to select management questions, conservation elements, and change agents. It also provides background information for each conservation element. Volume I of the Southern Great Plains REA report addresses the ecological communities (available online at https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20171100 ). Volume II (this volume) addresses the species and species assemblages. All source and derived datasets used to produce the maps and graphs for REAs are available online at the BLM Landscape Approach Data Portal ( https://landscape.blm.gov/geoportal/catalog/REAs/REAs.page ).

Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, ↗

USGS2018

Greater sage-grouse science (2015–17)—Synthesis and potential management implications

Executive Summary The greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ; hereafter called “sage-grouse”), a species that requires sagebrush (Artemisia spp.), has experienced range-wide declines in its distribution and abundance. These declines have prompted substantial research and management investments to improve the understanding of sage-grouse and its habitats and reverse declines in distribution and population numbers. Over the past two decades, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has responded to eight petitions to list the sage-grouse under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, with the completion of the most recent listing determination in September 2015. At that time, the USFWS determined that the sage-grouse did not warrant a listing, primarily because of the large scale science-based conservation and planning efforts completed or started by Federal, State, local agencies, private landowners, and other entities across the range. The planning efforts culminated in the development of the 2015 Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Forest Service Land Use Plan Amendments, which provided regulatory certainty and commitment from Federal land-management agencies to limit, mitigate, and track anthropogenic disturbance and implement other sage-grouse conservation measures. After these policy decisions, the scientific community has continued to refine and expand the knowledge available to inform implementation of management actions, increase the efficiency and effectiveness of those actions, and continue developing an overall understanding of sage-grouse populations, habitat requirements, and their response to human activity and other habitat changes. The development of science has been driven by multiple prioritization documents including the “Greater Sage-Grouse National Research Strategy” (Hanser and Manier, 2013) and, most recently, the “Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy Actionable Science Plan” (Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy Actionable Science Plan Team, 2016). In October 2017, after a review of the 2015 Federal plans relative to State sage-grouse plans, in accordance with Secretarial Order 3353, the BLM issued a notice of intent to consider whether to amend some, all, or none of the 2015 land use plans. At that time, the BLM requested the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to inform this effort through the development of an annotated bibliography of sage-grouse science published since January 2015 and a report that synthesized and outlined the potential management implications of this new science. Development of the annotated bibliography resulted in the identification and summarization of 169 peer-reviewed scientific publications and reports. The USGS then convened an interagency team (hereafter referred to as the “team”) to develop this report that focuses on the primary topics of importance to the ongoing management of sage-grouse and their habitats. The team developed this report in a three-step process. First, the team identified six primary topic areas for discussion based on the members’ collective knowledge regarding sage-grouse, their habitats, and threats to either or both. Second, the team reviewed all the material in the “Annotated Bibliography of Scientific Research on Greater Sage-Grouse Published since January 2015” to identify the science that addressed the topics. Third, team members discussed the science related to each topic, evaluated the consistency of the science with existing knowledge before 2015, and summarized the potential management implications of this science. The six primary topics identified by the team were: Multiscale habitat suitability and mapping tools Discrete anthropogenic activities Diffuse activities Fire and invasive species Restoration effectiveness Population estimation and genetics

Open-File Report↗

USGS2017

Southern Great Plains Rapid Ecoregional assessment—Volume I. Ecological communities

The Southern Great Plains Rapid Ecoregional Assessment was conducted in partnership with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Great Plains Landscape Conservation Cooperative . The overall goal of the Rapid Ecoregional Assessments (REAs) is to compile and synthesize regional datasets to facilitate evaluation of the cumulative effects of change agents on priority ecological communities and species. In particular, the REAs identify and map the distribution of communities and wildlife habitats at broad spatial extents and provide assessments of ecological conditions. The REAs also identify where and to what degree ecological resources are currently at risk from change agents, such as development, fire, invasive species, and climate change. The REAs can help managers identify and prioritize potential areas for conservation or restoration, assess cumulative effects as required by the National Environmental Policy Act, and inform landscape-level planning and management decisions for multiple uses of public lands. Management questions form the basis for the REA framework and were developed in conjunction with the BLM and other stakeholders. Conservation elements are communities and species that are of regional management concern. Core management questions relate to the key ecological attributes and change agents associated with each conservation element. Integrated management questions synthesize the results of the primary core management questions into overall landscape-level ranks for each conservation element. The ecological communities evaluated as conservation elements are shortgrass, mixed-grass, and sand prairies; all grasslands; riparian and nonplaya wetlands; playa wetlands and saline lakes; and prairie streams and rivers. Species and species assemblages evaluated are the freshwater mussel assemblage, Arkansas River shiner ( Notropis girardi ), ferruginous hawk ( Buteo regalis ), lesser prairie chicken ( Tympanuchus pallidicinctus ), snowy plover ( Charadrius nivosus ), mountain plover ( Charadrius montanus ), long-billed curlew ( Numenius americanus ), interior least tern ( Sternula antillarum athalassos ), burrowing owl ( Athene cunicularia hypugaea ), black-tailed prairie dog ( Cynomys ludovicianus ), bat assemblage, swift fox ( Vulpes velox ), and mule deer ( Odocoileus hemionus ). The Southern Great Plains REA is summarized in a series of three reports and associated datasets. The pre-assessment report (available online at https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2015/1003/ ) summarizes the process used by the REA stakeholders to select management questions, conservation elements, and change agents. It also provides background information for each conservation element. Volume I of the Southern Great Plains REA report (this volume) addresses the ecological communities. Volume II will address the species and species assemblages. All source and derived datasets used to produce the maps and graphs for REAs are available online at the BLM Landscape Approach Data Portal ( https://landscape.blm.gov/geoportal/catalog/REAs/REAs.page ).

Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, ↗

USGS2016

Estimated historical distribution of grassland communities of the Southern Great Plains

The purpose of this project was to map the estimated distribution of grassland communities of the Southern Great Plains prior to Euro-American settlement. The Southern Great Plains Rapid Ecoregional Assessment (REA), under the direction of the Bureau of Land Management and the Great Plains Landscape Conservation Cooperative, includes four ecoregions: the High Plains, Central Great Plains, Southwestern Tablelands, and the Nebraska Sand Hills. The REA advisors and stakeholders determined that the mapping accuracy of available national land-cover maps was insufficient in many areas to adequately address management questions for the REA. Based on the recommendation of the REA stakeholders, we estimated the potential historical distribution of 10 grassland communities within the Southern Great Plains project area using data on soils, climate, and vegetation from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) including the Soil Survey Geographic Database (SSURGO) and Ecological Site Information System (ESIS). The dominant grassland communities of the Southern Great Plains addressed as conservation elements for the REA area are shortgrass, mixed-grass, and sand prairies. We also mapped tall-grass, mid-grass, northwest mixed-grass, and cool season bunchgrass prairies, saline and foothill grasslands, and semi-desert grassland and steppe. Grassland communities were primarily defined using the annual productivity of dominant species in the ESIS data. The historical grassland community classification was linked to the SSURGO data using vegetation types associated with the predominant component of mapped soil units as defined in the ESIS data. We augmented NRCS data with Landscape Fire and Resource Management Planning Tools (LANDFIRE) Biophysical Settings classifications 1) where NRCS data were unavailable and 2) where fifth-level watersheds intersected the boundary of the High Plains ecoregion in Wyoming. Spatial data representing the estimated historical distribution of grassland communities of the Southern Great Plains are provided as a 30 x 30-meter gridded surface (raster dataset). This information will help to address the priority management questions for grassland communities for the Southern Great Plains REA and can be used to inform other regional-level land management decisions.

Southern Great Plains↗

USGS2015

Broad-scale assessments of ecological landscapes: developing methods and applications

The U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is developing a Landscape Approach for managing multiple uses of public lands by incorporating multiscale information to quantify the effects of natural and human influences on natural resource conditions and trends. A primary goal of the approach is to identify opportunities for resource conservation, restoration, and development. The BLM Landscape Approach is developing assessment methods that promote consistency in management decisions, identify ecological characteristics that promote ecosystem resilience under rapidly changing environmental conditions, and foster collaboration among land management agencies. The BLM Landscape Approach is closely aligned with the DOI’s “A Strategy for Improving the Mitigation Policies and Practices of The Department of the Interior.” A major component of the BLM Landscape Approach is the Rapid Ecoregional Assessment (REA) program. REAs identify important ecosystems and wildlife habitats at broad spatial scales and determine where these resources are at risk from environmental stressors that can affect the integrity of ecological systems. Building on the lessons learned from completed or current REAs, the BLM, in partnership with the U.S. Geological Survey, will perform systematic comparisons of REA methods to identify the most promising suite of landscape-level analysis tools. In addition, the BLM and USGS will develop practical applications that demonstrate how to incorporate assessment information to address existing management issues, such as cumulative effects of proposed management actions. The outcome of these efforts will be a set of comprehensive technical guidance documents for conducting and applying broad-scale assessments.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2015

Southern Great Plains Rapid Ecoregional Assessment: pre-assessment report

The purpose of the Pre-Assessment Report for the Southern Great Plains Rapid Ecoregional Assessment (REA) is to document the selection process for and final list of Conservation Elements, Change Agents, and Management Questions developed during Phase I. The overall goal of the REAs being conducted for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is to provide information that supports regional planning and analysis for the management of ecological resources. The REA provides an assessment of baseline ecological conditions, an evaluation of current risks from drivers of ecosystem change, and a predictive capacity for evaluating future risks. The REA also may be used for identifying priority areas for conservation or restoration and for assessing the cumulative effects of a variety of land uses. There are several components of the REAs. Management Questions, developed by the BLM and partners for the ecoregion, identify the information needed for addressing land-management responsibilities. Conservation Elements represent regionally significant terrestrial and aquatic species and communities that are to be conserved and (or) restored. For each Conservation Element, key ecological attributes will be evaluated to determine the status of each species and community. The REA also will evaluate major drivers of ecosystem change, or Change Agents, currently affecting or likely to affect the status of Conservation Elements in the future. The relationships between Change Agents and key ecological attributes will be summarized using conceptual models. The REA process is a two-phase process. Phase I (pre-assessment) includes developing and finalizing the lists of priority Management Questions, Conservation Elements, and Change Agents, culminating in the REA Pre-Assessment Report. Chapter 1 provides an overview of the REA process. Chapter 2 describes the biophysical and anthropogenic features of the Southern Great Plains, and Chapter 3 explains the process used to identify Conservation Elements, Change Agents and Management Questionss. The remaining chapters each feature one of 19 Conservation Elements—6 ecological communities and 13 species (including 2 species assemblages)—to be addressed in Phase II. For each Conservation Element, we will address the four primary Change Agents—development, fire, invasive species, and climate change—required for the REA. In addition, we will evaluate insect pests and disease for particular Conservation Elements. Development includes effects related to energy and infrastructure, agricultural activities, and other human activities, including urbanization and recreation. An overview on the ecology and management issues for each Conservation Element is provided, including distribution and ecology, landscape structure and dynamics, and associated species of management concern affiliated with each Conservation Element. For each Conservation Element, effects of the Change Agents are described. An overview of potential key ecological attributes and potential Change Agents are summarized by conceptual models and tables. The tables provide an organizational framework and background information for evaluating the key ecological attributes and Change Agents in Phase II.

Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas↗

USGS2014

U.S. Geological Survey Science for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative: 2012 annual report

Southwest Wyoming contains abundant energy resources, wildlife, habitat, open spaces, and outdoor recreational opportunities. Although energy exploration and development have been taking place in the region since the late 1800s, the pace of development for fossil fuels and renewable energy increased significantly in the early 2000s. This and the associated urban and exurban development are leading to landscape-level environmental and socioeconomic changes that have the potential to diminish wildlife habitat and other natural resources, and the quality of human lives, in Southwest Wyoming. The potential for negative effects of these changes prompted Federal, State, and local agencies to undertake the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative for Southwest Wyoming.

Wyoming↗

USGS2014

Two decision-support tools for assessing the potential effects of energy development on hydrologic resources as part of the Energy and Environment in the Rocky Mountain Area interactive energy atlas

The U.S. Geological Survey project—Energy and Environment in the Rocky Mountain Area (EERMA)—has developed a set of virtual tools in the form of an online interactive energy atlas for Colorado and New Mexico to facilitate access to geospatial data related to energy resources, energy infrastructure, and natural resources that may be affected by energy development. The interactive energy atlas currently (2014) consists of three components: (1) a series of interactive maps; (2) downloadable geospatial datasets; and (3) decison-support tools, including two maps related to hydrologic resources discussed in this report. The hydrologic-resource maps can be used to examine the potential effects of energy development on hydrologic resources with respect to (1) groundwater vulnerability, by using the depth to water, recharge, aquifer media, soil media, topography, impact of the vadose zone, and hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer (DRASTIC) model, and (2) landscape erosion potential, by using the revised universal soil loss equation (RUSLE). The DRASTIC aquifer vulnerability index value for the two-State area ranges from 48 to 199. Higher values, indicating greater relative aquifer vulnerability, are centered in south-central Colorado, areas in southeastern New Mexico, and along riparian corridors in both States—all areas where the water table is relatively close to the land surface and the aquifer is more susceptible to surface influences. As calculated by the RUSLE model, potential mean annual erosion, as soil loss in units of tons per acre per year, ranges from 0 to 12,576 over the two-State area. The RUSLE model calculated low erosion potential over most of Colorado and New Mexico, with predictions of highest erosion potential largely confined to areas of mountains or escarpments. An example is presented of how a fully interactive RUSLE model could be further used as a decision-support tool to evaluate the potential hydrologic effects of energy development on a site-specific basis and to explore the effectiveness of various mitigation practices.

Colorado;New Mexico↗

USGS2013

Locations and attributes of wind turbines in Colorado, 2011

This dataset represents an update to U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 597. Locations and attributes of wind turbines in Colorado, 2009 (available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/597/). This updated Colorado wind turbine Data Series provides geospatial data for all 1,204 wind turbines established within the State of Colorado as of September 2011, an increase of 297 wind turbines from 2009. Attributes specific to each turbine include: turbine location, manufacturer and model, rotor diameter, hub height, rotor height, potential megawatt output, land ownership, county, and development status of the wind turbine. Wind energy facility data for each turbine include: facility name, facility power capacity, number of turbines associated with each facility to date, facility developer, facility ownership, and year the facility went online. The locations of turbines are derived from 1-meter true-color aerial photographs produced by the National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP); the photographs have a positional accuracy of about ±5 meters. Locations of turbines constructed during or prior to August 2009 are based on August 2009 NAIP imagery and turbine locations constructed after August 2009 were based on September 2011 NAIP imagery. The location of turbines under construction during September 2011 likely will be less accurate than the location of existing turbines. This data series contributes to an Online Interactive Energy Atlas developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (http://my.usgs.gov/eerma/). The Energy Atlas synthesizes data on existing and potential energy development in Colorado and New Mexico and includes additional natural resource data layers. This information may be used by decisionmakers to evaluate and compare the potential benefits and tradeoffs associated with different energy development strategies or scenarios. Interactive maps, downloadable data layers, comprehensive metadata, and decision-support tools also are included in the Energy Atlas. The format of the Energy Atlas is designed to facilitate the integration of information about energy with key terrestrial and aquatic resources for evaluating resource values and minimizing risks from energy development.

Colorado↗

USGS2013

Locations and attributes of wind turbines in New Mexico, 2011

This dataset represents an update to U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 596. Locations and attributes of wind turbines in New Mexico, 2009 (available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/596/).This updated New Mexico wind turbine Data Series provides geospatial data for all 562 wind turbines established within the State of New Mexico as of June 2011, an increase of 155 wind turbines from 2009. Attributes specific to each turbine include: turbine location, manufacturer and model, rotor diameter, hub height, rotor height, potential megawatt output, land ownership, county, and development status of wind turbine. Wind energy facility data for each turbine include: facility name, facility power capacity, number of turbines associated with each facility to date, facility developer, facility ownership, and year the facility went online. The locations of turbines are derived from 1-meter true-color aerial photographs produced by the National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP); the photographs have a positional accuracy of about ±5 meters. The locations of turbines constructed during or prior to August 2009 are based on August 2009 NAIP imagery and turbine locations constructed after August 2009 were based June 2011 NAIP imagery. The location of turbines under construction during June 2011 likely will be less accurate than the location of existing turbines. This data series contributes to an Online Interactive Energy Atlas developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (http://my.usgs.gov/eerma/). The Energy Atlas synthesizes data on existing and potential energy development in Colorado and New Mexico and includes additional natural resource data layers. This information may be used by decisionmakers to evaluate and compare the potential benefits and tradeoffs associated with different energy development strategies or scenarios. Interactive maps, downloadable data layers, comprehensive metadata, and decision-support tools also are included in the Energy Atlas. The format of the Energy Atlas is designed to facilitate the integration of information about energy with key terrestrial and aquatic resources for evaluating resource values and minimizing risks from energy development.

New Mexico↗

USGS2013

Wyoming Basin Rapid Ecoregional Assessment

The overall goal of the Wyoming Basin Rapid Ecoregional Assessment (REA) is to provide information that supports regional planning and analysis for the management of ecological resources. The REA provides an assessment of baseline ecological conditions, an evaluation of current risks from drivers of ecosystem change (including energy development, fire, and invasive species), and a predictive capacity for evaluating future risks (including climate change). Additionally, the REA may be used for identifying priority areas for conservation or restoration and for assessing cumulative effects of multiple land uses. The Wyoming Basin REA will address Management Questions developed by the Bureau of Land Management and other agency partners for 8 major biomes and 19 species or species assemblages. The maps developed for addressing Management Questions will be integrated into overall maps of landscape-level ecological values and risks. The maps can be used to address the goals of the REA at a number of levels: for individual species, species assemblages, aquatic and terrestrial systems, and for the entire ecoregion. This allows flexibility in how the products of the REA are compiled to inform planning and management actions across a broad range of spatial scales.

Colorado;Idaho;Montana;Utah;Wyoming↗

USGS2013

Interactive energy atlas for Colorado and New Mexico: An online resource for decisionmakers

Throughout the western United States, increased demand for energy is driving the rapid development of nonrenewable and renewable energy resources. Resource managers must balance the benefits of energy development with the potential consequences for ecological resources and ecosystem services. To facilitate access to geospatial data related to energy resources, energy infrastructure, and natural resources that may be affected by energy development, the U.S. Geological Survey has developed an online Interactive Energy Atlas (Energy Atlas) for Colorado and New Mexico. The Energy Atlas is designed to meet the needs of varied users who seek information about energy in the western United States. The Energy Atlas has two primary capabilities: a geographic information system (GIS) data viewer and an interactive map gallery. The GIS data viewer allows users to preview and download GIS data related to energy potential and development in Colorado and New Mexico. The interactive map gallery contains a collection of maps that compile and summarize thematically related data layers in a user-friendly format. The maps are dynamic, allowing users to explore data at different resolutions and obtain information about the features being displayed. The Energy Atlas also includes an interactive decision-support tool, which allows users to explore the potential consequences of energy development for species that vary in their sensitivity to disturbance.

Colorado, New Mexico↗