Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Cultural Resources Management”

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

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

At least 253 records · Page 14Linked to original sources
USGS2022

Drought and water management in ancient Maya society

Paleoclimate research in the Maya region of Mesoamerica provides compelling evidence of drought during key periods of cultural transition in Maya society. These include the transition from the Preclassic to the Classic, and from Classic to the Postclassic. Previous research emphasized a causal relationship between drought and cultural change, or so-called “collapse” in the Maya region. Recent advances in the range and precision of climate-sensitive proxies and the development of new archives have enabled quantitative reconstructions of past hydroclimate, as well as providing evidence of high impact, short-duration events, such as tropical cyclones. Simultaneously, archaeological research has unearthed widespread evidence of technologies used by the Maya to exert control over water resources in urban, rural, and agricultural settings. Evidence suggests that many of these water features were in use for multiple generations, possibly centuries, and many were constructed during the Terminal Preclassic and Terminal Classic periods. We suggest that, given the availability of new archaeological and paleoclimate records, these data can be combined to identify the full complexity of Maya adaptation to hydroclimate variability to emphasize adaptation and resilience to both water scarcity and over-abundance (e.g., flooding). Such syntheses, which can offer lessons for present-day efforts to grapple with regional climate change, will benefit from additional studies in data-poor zones of the Maya region, as well as public archiving of paleoclimate and archaeological data.

Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environm↗
USGS1988

Selawik National Wildlife Refuge land cover mapping project users guide

Title III of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA, 1980) established the Selawik National Wildlife Refuge (SNWR). Section 304 of the Act requires the Secretary of Interior to "prepare, and from time to time revise, a comprehensive conservation plan" for the refuge. Before developing a plan for the refuge, the Secretary shall "identify and describe--a) the populations and habitats of the fish and wildlife resources of the refuge; b) the special values of the refuge as well as any other archeological, cultural, ecological, geological, historical, palentological, scenic, or wilderness value of the refuge; c) areas within the refuge that are suitable for use as administrative sites or visitor facilities...; d) present the potential requirements for access with respect to the refuge...; and e) significant problems which may adversely affect the populations and habitats of fish and wildlife identified and described..." (ANILCA, 1980). Vegetation, water, and terrain (elevation, slope, and aspect) are the components of habitat and can be used in the determination of the above requirements. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) has the responsibility for collecting the resource information to address the research, management, development and planning requirements identified in Section 304. Because of the brief period provided by the Act for data collection, habitat mapping, and habitat assessment, the USFWS in cooperation with the U.S. Geological Survey's EROS Field Office, used digital Landsat multispectral scanner (MSS) data and digital terrain data to produce land cover and terrain maps. A computer assisted digital analysis of Landsat MSS data was used because coverage by aerial photographs was incomplete for the refuge and because the level of detail obtained from Landsat data was adequate to meet most USFWS research, management and planning needs. Relative cost and time requirements were also factors in the decision to use the digital analysis approach.

Alaska↗
USGS2010

Strategic Science for Coral Ecosystems 2007-2011

Shallow and deep coral ecosystems are being imperiled by a combination of stressors. Climate change, unsustainable fishing practices, and disease are transforming coral communities at regional to global scales. At local levels, excessive amounts of sediments, nutrients, and contaminants are also impacting the many benefits that healthy coral ecosystems provide. This Plan, Strategic Science for Coral Ecosystems, describes the information needs of resource managers and summarizes current research being conducted by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists and partners. It outlines important research actions that need to be undertaken over the next five years to achieve more accurate forecasting of future conditions and develop more effective decision-support tools to adaptively manage coral ecosystems. The overarching outcome of this Plan, if fully implemented, would be in transferring relevant knowledge to decision-makers, enabling them to better protect and sustain coral ecosystem services. These services include sources of food, essential habitat for fisheries and protected species, protection of coastlines from wave damage and erosion, recreation, and cultural values for indigenous communities. The USGS has a long history of research and monitoring experience in studying ancient and living coral communities and serving many stakeholders. The research actions in this Plan build on the USGS legacy of conducting integrated multidisciplinary science to address complex environmental issues. This Plan is responsive to Federal legislation and authorities and a variety of external and internal drivers that include the President's Ocean Action Plan, the recommendations of the Coral Reef Task Force, the information needs of Bureaus in the Department of Interior, the USGS Bureau Science Strategy (USGS 2007) and the formal plans of several USGS Programs. To achieve this Plan's desired outcomes will require increased funding and more effective coordination and collaboration among USGS managers and scientists within a national and international framework of partnerships in coral ecosystem science.

Circular↗
USGS2023

Wildlife health surveillance: Gaps, needs and opportunities

Disease emergence represent a global threat for public health, economy, and biological conservation and most of the emerging diseases have zoonotic origin from wildlife. To prevent their spread and to support the implementation of control measures, disease surveillance and reporting systems are needed, and due to globalisation, these activities should be carried at world level. To define the main gaps affecting the performances of wildlife health surveillance and reporting systems at word level, we analysed the Wildlife Disease Surveillance Survey submitted to all Members of World Organisation for Animal Health which inquire on structure and limits of surveillance and reporting systems. The response from 103 Members, covering all world areas, showed that 54.4% of them have a wildlife disease surveillance programme and 66% implemented a strategy to manage their spread. The lack of dedicated budget affected the possibility of outbreak investigations, sampling collection and diagnostic testing. Although most Members maintain records relating to wildlife mortality or morbidity events in centralised databases, data analyses and disease risk assessment are reported as main needs. Our evaluation of surveillance capacity showed an overall low level associated to great variability between Members not restricted to specific geographical area. A better recognition of the value of wildlife disease surveillance resulting in allocation of adequate resources by governments would make wildlife disease surveillance systems more functional. Moreover, the future comprehension of the influence of socio-economic, cultural and biodiversity aspects will be essential to increase better disease surveillance under One Health approach.

Scientific and Technical Review↗
USGS1987

Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge land cover mapping project users guide

Title III of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 (ANILCA, 1980) established the Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge (TNWR). Section 304 of the Act requires the Secretary of Interior to "prepare, and from time to time revise, a comprehensive conservation plan" for the refuge. Before developing a plan for the refuge, the Secretary shall identify and describe--a) the populations and habitats of the fish and wildlife resources of the refuge; b) the special values of the refuge as well as any other archeological, cultural, ecological, geological, historical, palentological, scenic, or wilderness value of the refuge; c) areas within the refuge that are suitable for use as administrative sites or visitor facilities… ; d) present the potential requirements for access with respect to the refuge… ; and e) significant problems which may adversely affect the populations and habitats of fish and wildlife identified and described... (ANILCA, 1980). Vegetation, water, and terrain (elevation, slope, and aspect) are the components of habitat and can be used in the determination of the above requirements. The U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) has the responsibility for collecting the resource information to address the research, management, development and planning requirements identified in Section 304. Because of the brief period provided by the Act for data collection, habitat mapping, and habitat assessment, the USFWS in cooperation with the U.S. Geological Survey's EROS Field Office, used digital Landsat multispectral scanner data (MSS) and digital terrain data to produce land cover and terrain maps. A computer assisted digital analysis of Landsat MSS data was used because coverage by aerial photographs was incomplete for much of the refuge and because the level of detail, obtained from the analysis of Landsat data, is adequate to meet most USFWS research, management and planning needs. Relative cost and time requirements were also factors in the decision to use the digital analysis approach.

Alaska↗
USGS1987

Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge land cover mapping project user's guide

Title III of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA, 1980) established the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge (YFNWR). Section 304 of the Act requires the Secretary of Interior to "prepare, and from time to time revise, a comprehensive conservation plan" for the refuge. Before developing a plan for the refuge, the Secretary shall "identify and describe--a) the populations and habitats of the fish and wildlife resources of the refuge; b) the special values of the refuge as well as any other archeological, cultural, ecological, geological , historical, palentological, scenic, or wilderness value of the refuge; c) areas within the refuge that are suitable for use as administrative sites or visitor facilities...; d) present the potential requirements for access with respect to the refuge...; and e) significant problems which may adversely affect the populations and habitats of fish and wildlife identified and described..." (ANILCA, 1980). Vegetation, water, and terrain (elevation, slope, and aspect) are the components of habitat and can be used in the determination of the above requirements. The U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) has the responsibility for collecting the resource information to address the research, management, development and planning requirements identified in Section 304. Because of the brief period provided by the Act for data collection, habitat mapping, and habitat assessment, the USFWS in cooperation with the U.S. Geological Survey's EROS Field Office, used digital Landsat multispectral scanner (MSS) data and digital terrain data to produce land cover and terrain maps. A computer assisted digital analysis of Landsat MSS data was used because coverage by aerial photographs was incomplete for much of the refuge and because the level of detail obtained from Landsat data was adequate to meet most USFWS research, management and planning needs. Relative cost and time requirements were also factors in the decision to use the digital analysis approach.

Alaska↗
USGS2018

Trophic implications of a phenological paradigm shift: Bald eagles and salmon in a changing climate

Climate change influences apex predators in complex ways, due to their important trophic position, capacity for resource plasticity, and sensitivity to numerous anthropogenic stressors. Bald eagles, an ecologically and culturally significant apex predator, congregate seasonally in high densities on salmon spawning rivers across the Pacific Northwest. One of the largest eagle concentrations is in the Skagit River watershed, which connects the montane wilderness of North Cascades National Park to the Puget Sound. Using multiple long‐term datasets, we evaluated local bald eagle abundance in relation to chum and coho salmon availability; salmon phenology; and the number and timing of flood events in the Skagit. We analysed changes over time as a reflection of climate change impacts, as well as differences between managed and unmanaged portions of the river. We found that peaks in chum salmon and bald eagle presence have advanced at remarkably similar rates ( c . 0.45 days/year), suggesting synchronous phenological responses within this trophic relationship. Yet the temporal relationship between chum salmon spawning and flood events, which remove salmon carcasses from the system, has not remained constant. This has resulted in a paradigm shift whereby the peak of chum spawning now occurs before the first flood event of the season rather than after. The interval between peak chum and first flood event was a significant predictor of bald eagle presence: as this interval grew over time (by nearly one day per year), bald eagle counts declined, with a steady decrease in bald eagle observations since 2002. River section was also an important factor, with fewer flood events, and more eagle observations occurring in the river section experiencing direct hydroelectric flow management. Synthesis and applications . The effects of climate change and hydroelectric management contribute to a complex human footprint in the North Cascades National Park, an otherwise largely natural ecosystem. By accounting for the differential phenological impacts of climate change on bald eagles, salmon, and flood events, Park managers and the operators of the hydroelectric system can more effectively ensure the resilience of the eagle–salmon relationship along the Skagit River.

Washington↗
USGS2004

USA: Glacier National Park, Biosphere Reserve and GLORIA Site

The National Park Service of the United States has 388 designated protected areas and parks that include historic and cultural sites as well as ‘natural resource’ parks set aside for their unique and outstanding natural features. Early efforts to create parks were focused on areas of beauty or unusual features but later efforts increasingly aimed to protect biodiversity and intact ecosystems. Protected areas in the National Park Service are found in nearly all the fifty states from Florida to Alaska, with examples of preserved natural environments ranging from coral reefs to the icy summit of Mt. McKinley in Alaska, at 6,187 m. Many of the larger parks have been designated as Biosphere Reserves under the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Man and the Biosphere Programme. The area now managed as Glacier National Park was first set aside as a Forest Reserve in 1897 and then designated as a national park in 1910, six years before a national park service was created to oversee the growing number of parks that the US Congress was establishing. Waterton National Park was created by Canada immediately north of the US–Canada border during the same period. In 1932, a joint lobbying effort by private citizens and groups convinced both the United States and Canada to establish the world’s first trans-boundary park to explicitly underscore and symbolize the neighbourly relationship between these two countries. This became the world’s first ‘peace’ park and was named Waterton–Glacier International Peace Park. The combined park is managed collaboratively on many issues but each national park is separately funded and operates under different national statutes and laws. It was, however, jointly named a Biosphere Reserve in 1976 and a World Heritage Site in 1995. There have been recent efforts to significantly increase the size of Waterton National Park by adding publicly owned forests on the western side of the continental divide in British Columbia, Canada. For the purposes of this chapter, I will emphasize the US portion of the Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park and refer to it as the Glacier Mountain Biosphere Reserve (MBR).

Montana↗
USGS2023

Advances in transboundary aquifer assessment

This Special Issue is intended to highlight both recent work to advance the physical understanding of transboundary aquifers and factors relevant in successful collaboration on transboundary groundwater resource use. The collected papers address: (1) the identification and prioritization of the needs and strategies for sustainable groundwater development and use, along with the complexities introduced by working across borders with differing governance frameworks, institutions, cultures, and sometimes languages; (2) the characterization of the physical framework of the aquifer, stressors on the aquifer system, and how those stressors influence the availability of groundwater in terms of its quantity and quality; and (3) the incorporation of stakeholder input and prioritization directly into the process of aquifer assessment and model building. The papers provide insights into the state of knowledge regarding the physical characterization of important transboundary aquifers, primarily along the U.S.–Mexico border and the opportunities for greater stakeholder involvement in resource evaluation and prioritization. They point the way towards a future focus that combines both of these aspects of transboundary aquifer assessment for informing groundwater management discussions by policymakers.

Water↗
USGS2020

Biological soil crusts in ecological restoration: Emerging research and perspectives

Drylands encompass over 40% of terrestrial ecosystems and face significant anthropogenic degradation causing a loss of ecosystem integrity, services, and deterioration of social‐ecological systems. To combat this degradation, some dryland restoration efforts have focused on the use of biological soil crusts (biocrusts): complex communities of cyanobacteria, algae, lichens, bryophytes, and other organisms living in association with the top millimeters of soil. Biocrusts are common in many ecosystems and especially drylands. They perform a suite of ecosystem functions: stabilizing soil surfaces to prevent erosion, contributing carbon through photosynthesis, fixing nitrogen, and mediating the hydrological cycle in drylands. Biocrusts have emerged as a potential tool in restoration; developing methods to implement effective biocrust restoration has the potential to return many ecosystem functions and services. Although culture‐based approaches have allowed researchers to learn about the biology, physiology, and cultivation of biocrusts, transferring this knowledge to field implementation has been more challenging. A large amount of research has amassed to improve our understanding of biocrust restoration, leaving us at an opportune time to learn from one another and to join approaches for maximum efficacy. The articles in this special issue improve the state of our current knowledge in biocrust restoration, highlighting efforts to effectively restore biocrusts through a variety of different ecosystems, across scales and utilizing a variety of lab and field methods. This collective work provides a useful resource for the scientific community as well as land managers.

Restoration Ecology↗
USGS2021

Climate change vulnerability assessment for the California coastal national monument—Trinidad and Point Arena-Stornetta units

Executive Summary The California Coastal National Monument protects islets, reefs, and rock outcropping habitats in six onshore units, including the Trinidad and Point Arena-Stornetta Units. The California Coastal National Monument provides crucial habitat for resident and migratory species of seabirds, marine mammals, and invertebrates, which includes several federally listed threatened and endangered species. Also, the California Coastal National Monument encompasses important tribal, cultural, and historical sites along the coastline of California. We used three approaches to assess the climate change vulnerability of the Trinidad and Point Arena-Stornetta Units: (1) a qualitative approach using peer-reviewed literature and previous work done in the Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment for the North-central California Coast and Ocean (Hutto and others, 2015), (2) interactive workshops with local stakeholders to identify specific resources, and (3) spatial analysis to estimate sea-level rise vulnerability for the rocky shoreline and key resources within the units. Information from stakeholder workshops held (in 2017) in the cities of Point Arena and Trinidad identified climate change impacts as an important management concern for the resilience, health, and ecosystem services of the California Coastal National Monument units. Impacts that were identified included sea-level rise, changes in precipitation and fog, warming oceans, and loss of species (birds, fisheries, marine mammals). Boat surveys were done for each unit to estimate the number of rocky features and the biota using the rocks. At the Trinidad Unit, 138 rocks were surveyed and 17 different wildlife species were observed, whereas at the Point Arena-Stornetta Unit, 40 rocks were surveyed and 10 different wildlife species were observed. Individual rocky features surveyed within the units were then ranked on sea-level rise exposure and vulnerability scales with 1 being the least vulnerable/exposed and 5 the most. Forty-nine and fifty-eight percent of surveyed rocks had a sea-level rise exposure ranking of 4 or 5 (high) for the Trinidad Unit and Point Arena-Stornetta Units respectively. Forty-eight percent of offshore rocks had a sea-level rise vulnerability score of 3 or greater (high) for the Trinidad Unit, and forty-three percent of rocks had a vulnerability score of 3 or greater for the Point Arena-Stornetta Unit. When examining guild use of vulnerable rocks (vulnerability score greater than 3), at the Trinidad Unit alcid species (here defined as common murres and pigeon guillemots) were observed on only 28 percent of vulnerable rocks, shorebirds on 30 percent, sea lions on 40 percent, gulls on 43 percent, seabirds on 58 percent, and mammals on 75 percent, whereas at the Point Arena-Stornetta Unit alcid species were observed on 0 percent of vulnerable rocks, gulls on 33 percent, seabirds on 57 percent, and mammals on 50 percent. Sea-level rise has the potential to submerge small low-relief offshore rocks and make them uninhabitable for birds and marine mammals but could provide more intertidal and subtidal rocky habitats. We found that nearly half of the offshore rocks at both sites are vulnerable and have the potential to realize this outcome; however, the larger and tall-relief rocks at these sites are less vulnerable to sea-level rise and are expected to continue to provide habitat for avian species.

California↗
USGS2011

Weeds of Hawaii’s lands devoted to watershed protection and biodiversity conservation: Role of biological control as the missing piece in an integrated pest management strategy

Despite Hawaii’s reputation as an extinction icon, significant biological resources remain, especially in watersheds, natural areas, and specialized edaphic sites (e.g., lava dry forest, coastal). While direct habitat destruction by humans continues, human-facilitated biological invaders are currently the primary agents of continuing degradation. The ability of invasive plants to have prolific seed production, efficient dispersal systems, and to become established in dense vegetation, complicated by Hawaii’s rugged topography, appears to render mechanical and chemical control as mere holding actions. Costly, ‘environmentally unfriendly’, and often ineffective, strategies using chemical and mechanical control on a large scale, despite the most valiant of efforts, can be viewed simply as attempts to buy time. Without increased levels of safely tested biological control, the seemingly inevitable result is the landscape level transformation of native forests, with potentially catastrophic consequences to cultural, biological, water, and economic resources. Increased levels of effective biological control for certain intractable invasive species appear to comprise a conspicuous ‘missing piece’ in our efforts to protect Hawaiian watersheds and other conservation lands.

Hawaii↗
USGS2018

Northern Great Plains

In the Northern Great Plains, the timing and quantity of both precipitation and runoff have important consequences for water supplies, agricultural activities, and energy production. Overall, climate projections suggest that the number of heavy precipitation events (events with greater than 1 inch per day of rainfall) is projected to increase. Moving forward, the magnitude of year-to-year variability overshadows the small projected average decrease in streamflow. Changes in extreme events are likely to overwhelm average changes in both the eastern and western regions of the Northern Great Plains. Major flooding across the basin in 2011 was followed by severe drought in 2012, representing new and unprecedented variability that is likely to become more common in a warmer world. The Northern Great Plains region plays a critical role in national food security. Among other anticipated changes, projected warmer and generally wetter conditions with elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations are expected to increase the abundance and competitive ability of weeds and invasive species, increase livestock production and efficiency of production, and result in longer growing seasons at mid- and high latitudes. Net primary productivity, including crop yields and forage production, is also likely to increase, although an increasing number of extreme temperature events during critical pollination and grain fill periods is likely to reduce crop yields. Ecosystems across the Northern Great Plains provide recreational opportunities and other valuable goods and services that are ingrained in the region’s cultures. Higher temperatures, reduced snow cover, and more variable precipitation will make it increasingly challenging to manage the region’s valuable wetlands, rivers, and snow-dependent ecosystems. In the mountains of western Wyoming and western Montana, the fraction of total water in precipitation that falls as snow is expected to decline by 25% to 40% by 2100 under a higher scenario (RCP8.5), which would negatively affect the region’s winter recreation industry. At lower-elevation areas of the Northern Great Plains, climate-induced land-use changes in agriculture can have cascading effects on closely entwined natural ecosystems, such as wetlands, and the diverse species and recreational opportunities they support. Energy resources in the Northern Great Plains include abundant crude oil, natural gas, coal, wind, and stored water, and to a lesser extent, corn-based ethanol, solar energy, and uranium. The infrastructure associated with the extraction, distribution, and energy produced from these resources is vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Railroads and pipelines are vulnerable to damage or disruption from increasing heavy precipitation events and associated flooding and erosion. Declining water availability in the summer would likely increase costs for oil production operations, which require freshwater resources. These cost increases will either lead to lower production or be passed on to consumers. Finally, higher maximum temperatures, longer and more severe heat waves, and higher overnight lows are expected to increase electricity demand for cooling in the summer, further stressing the power grid. Indigenous peoples in the region are observing changes to climate, many of which are impacting livelihoods as well as traditional subsistence and wild foods, wildlife, plants and water for ceremonies, medicines, and health and well-being. Because some tribes and Indigenous peoples are among those in the region with the highest rates of poverty and unemployment, and because many are still directly reliant on natural resources, they are among the most at risk to climate change (e.g., Gamble et al. 2016, Cozzetto et al. 2013, Espey et al. 2014, Wong et al. 2014, Kornfeld 2016, Paul and Caplins 2016, Maynard 2014, USGCRP 2017)

Report↗
USGS2017

Indicator-driven conservation planning across terrestrial, freshwater aquatic, and marine ecosystems of the south Atlantic, USA

Systematic conservation planning, a widely used approach to identify priority lands and waters, uses efficient, defensible, and transparent methods aimed at conserving biodiversity and ecological systems. Limited financial resources and competing land uses can be major impediments to conservation; therefore, participation of diverse stakeholders in the planning process is advantageous to help address broad-scale threats and challenges of the 21st century. Although a broad extent is needed to identify core areas and corridors for fish and wildlife populations, a fine-scale resolution is needed to manage for multiple, interconnected ecosystems. Here, we developed a conservation plan using a systematic approach to promote landscape-level conservation within the extent of the South Atlantic Landscape Conservation Cooperative. Our objective was to identify the highest-ranked 30% of lands and waters within the South Atlantic deemed necessary to conserve ecological and cultural integrity for the 10 primary ecosystems of the southeastern United States. These environments varied from terrestrial, freshwater aquatic, and marine. The planning process was driven by indicators of ecosystem integrity at a 4-ha resolution. We used the program Zonation and 28 indicators to optimize the identification of lands and waters to meet the stated objective. A novel part of our study was the prioritization of multiple ecosystems, and we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of this approach. The evaluation of indicator representation within prioritizations was a useful method to show where improvements could be made; some indicators dictated hotspots, some had a limited extent and were well represented, and others had a limited effect. Overall, we demonstrate that a broad-scale (408,276 km 2 of terrestrial and 411,239 km 2 of marine environments) conservation plan can be realized at a fine-scale resolution, which will allow implementation of the regional plan at a local level relevant to decision making.

Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management↗
USGS2009

Options for national parks and reserves for adapting to climate change

Past and present climate has shaped the valued ecosystems currently protected in parks and reserves, but future climate change will redefine these conditions. Continued conservation as climate changes will require thinking differently about resource management than we have in the past; we present some logical steps and tools for doing so. Three critical tenets underpin future management plans and activities: (1) climate patterns of the past will not be the climate patterns of the future; (2) climate defines the environment and influences future trajectories of the distributions of species and their habitats; (3) specific management actions may help increase the resilience of some natural resources, but fundamental changes in species and their environment may be inevitable. Science-based management will be necessary because past experience may not serve as a guide for novel future conditions. Identifying resources and processes at risk, defining thresholds and reference conditions, and establishing monitoring and assessment programs are among the types of scientific practices needed to support a broadened portfolio of management activities. In addition to the control and hedging management strategies commonly in use today, we recommend adaptive management wherever possible. Adaptive management increases our ability to address the multiple scales at which species and processes function, and increases the speed of knowledge transfer among scientists and managers. Scenario planning provides a broad forward-thinking framework from which the most appropriate management tools can be chosen. The scope of climate change effects will require a shared vision among regional partners. Preparing for and adapting to climate change is as much a cultural and intellectual challenge as an ecological challenge.

Environmental Management↗
USGS2011

Developing an institutional framework to incorporate ecosystem services into decision making-Proceedings of a workshop

The routine and effective incorporation of ecosystem services information into resource management decisions requires a careful consideration of the value of goods and services provided by natural systems. A multidisciplinary workshop was held in October 2008 on "Developing an Institutional Framework to Incorporate Ecosystem Services into Decision Making." This report summarizes that workshop, which focused on examining the relationship between an institutional framework and consideration of ecosystem services in resource management decision making. This workshop was the third in a series of three preconference workshops associated with ACES 2008 (A Conference on Ecosystem Services): Using Science for Decision Making in Dynamic Systems. These workshops were designed to explore the ACES 2008 theme on decision making and how the concept of ecosystem services can more effectively be incorporated into conservation, restoration, resource management, and development decisions. Preconference workshop 1, "Developing a Vision: Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Decision Making," was held April 15, 2008, in Cambridge, MA. In this workshop, participants addressed what would have to happen to make ecosystem services more routinely and effectively used in conservation, restoration, resource management, and development decisions, and identified some key challenges to developing the analytical framework (Hogan and others, 2009). Preconference workshop 2, "Developing an Analytical Framework: Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Decision Making," was held July 28, 2008, in Naples, FL, and focused on the analytical process and identification of research priorities for ecosystem services, their production and use, their spatial and temporal characteristics, their relationship with natural systems, and their interdependencies (Hogan and others, 2010). The summary presented here synthesizes the discussion at workshop 3 and considers how institutional structures and policy instruments can be used to achieve the vision developed in workshop 1, while recognizing the analytical capabilities and limitations identified in workshop 2. Our purpose was to identify how to use ecosystem service information more effectively and broadly in resource management and development decisions. We recognized the need to facilitate an integrated understanding of (1) the natural capital that produces ecosystem services; (2) the geospatial and temporal aspects of ecosystem service production, values, and use; (3) the value of ecosystem services (monetary and nonmonetary); and (4) institutional instruments, processes, and structures (property rights, laws, governance structures, and courts, for example). Interdisciplinary collaboration and understanding is beneficial and needs to engage stakeholders. The appropriate use of institutional structures, including markets, to integrate ecosystem services into decision making depends on the players and characteristics of the specific situation (such as stakeholders, the ecosystem, resources, and the political environment). Incorporating ecosystem service values into decisions requires consideration of place-based social, cultural, economic, and landscape characteristics and institutions. Thus, a single, prescribed solution will not work-various institutional strategies must be used in different situations. Market-based approaches require appropriate regulations, monitoring, and enforcement, depending on the situation and place. Further, market approaches will need to be coupled with nonmarket approaches into an integrated institutional framework.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1985

Water resources of north-central Iowa

One of man's fundamental needs is water. Modern man needs both a safe and dependable supply of water to maintain his present economic, industrial, and cultural level. In order to use this natural resource in the most efficient and beneficial manner, a basic knowledge and understanding of water sources, and of the occurrence and potential of each source, needs to be gained. To provide this information, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Iowa Geological Survey, has compiled this atlas. It describes the water resources available for development in an 11-county area in north-central Iowa. The report contains information on the quantity, quality, and use of water from all known sources of water. This information is presented to aid water users and developers who are searching for and evaluating sources of water for specific sites. It also will be an aid to water planners and managers who must develop the available water resources on a regional basis.

Iowa↗
USGS2025

The National Park Service stratotype inventory

Introduction An Inventory of Stratigraphic Origins within the National Park Service The geologic history of Earth is recorded in layers or bodies of rock that are classified in a hierarchical order with several different categories of geologic units, including: supergroup, group, formation, member, bed, supersuite, suite, or complex. Geologists analyze and classify rock types based on properties that include lithology, texture, thickness, sedimentary structures, fossils, geographic or geospatial distribution, and age. In instances where new geologic units are proposed, a stratotype is assigned to a designated section, locality, or area of well-exposed rock that displays diagnostic characteristics for identification and correlation. Stratotypes are also namesakes, in that formally recognized rock units are named for the places where they were first described, measured, and mapped. Thus, a vast majority of the stratigraphic nomenclature alludes to geographic or geologic features. Some particularly recognizable examples (and their stratotype assignments) include the Paleoproterozoic Vishnu Schist (Vishnu Canyon in Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona), the Early Cambrian Harpers Formation (Harpers Ferry National Historical Park, West Virginia), and the Late Cretaceous Whitney Granodiorite (Mount Whitney in Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks, California). Beginning in 2020, the National Park Service (NPS) began a systematic effort to document the occurrence of stratotypes exposed within, partially within, and near NPS administrative boundaries. The NPS stratotype inventory project represents an important component of a geologic resource inventory, as these designations are vital to our national geologic heritage (herein referred to as “geoheritage”) and possess significant scientific, historic, educational, cultural, and aesthetic values. The geoheritage significance of stratotypes is analogous to libraries and museums, in that they are geologic landmarks of Earth history and record the prodigious forces and evolving life forms that define our understanding of the planet. These designated exposures preserve knowledge, represent comparative geologic references where previous observations can be re-examined or reinterpreted, and can serve as valuable educational tools for future geoscientists (Brocx and others, 2019). The NPS stratotype inventory includes the following: Documentation of designated stratotype exposures to confirm their geospatial occurrence within, partially within, and near NPS administrative boundaries, compiled from published reports and maps; Compilation and visualization of the precise geographic locations of the stratotype exposures; and Recommendations that address potential land and resource management issues associated with NPS stratotypes. By achieving these goals, this project helps to raise awareness of stratotypes as a geologic resource by educating NPS staff and the public so that they may better understand, recognize, and protect these important park resources. The focused approach adopted for conducting the stratotype inventories throughout the NPS has centered on the 32 Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) networks established by the NPS during the late 1990s (for more information on each network, see https://www.nps.gov/im/networks.htm). The I&M networks represent groups or clusters of park units that are based on shared geography and natural resource characteristics. The Greater Yellowstone I&M Network, encompassing Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area, Grand Teton National Park, John D. Rockefeller Jr. Memorial Parkway, and Yellowstone National Park, was used as the pilot network for initiating this stratotype inventory and was first published in November 2020 (Henderson and others, 2020). The 32d and final report on the Northeast Temperate I&M Network was published in October 2022 (Henderson and others, 2022). Currently, the NPS stratotype inventory project has identified more than 700 stratotypes within NPS administrative boundaries.

Professional Paper↗