Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Ocean and Coastal 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 271 records · Page 15Linked to original sources
USGS2021

Incorporating water quality analysis into navigation assessments as demonstrated in the Mississippi River Basin

A description of historical and ambient water quality conditions is often required as part of navigational studies. This paper describes a series of tools developed by the USGS that can aid navigation managers in developing water quality assessments. The tools use R, a statistical software program, and provide methods to retrieve historical streamflow and water quality data, summarize observations, model concentrations and fluxes, and estimate seasonal, annual, and decadal trends. The utility of these tools is demonstrated by providing an analysis of the seasonal variability and long-term trends of nitrate plus nitrite, orthophosphate, and suspended sediment concentrations and fluxes at nine sites in the Mississippi River Basin. Trends in annual mean concentration and flux showed fairly stable nitrate plus nitrite at most of the nine sites, with increases in the Upper Mississippi and Missouri Rivers and decreases on the Illinois River over a 40-year period beginning in 1980. Orthophosphate concentration or flux increased at almost all sites over a similar time period. Conversely, a concurrent steady decline in suspended sediment concentrations and fluxes was noted at sites throughout the basin.

Mississippi River Basin↗
USGS2007

Coastal systems and low-lying areas

Since the IPCC Third Assessment Report (TAR), our understanding of the implications of climate change for coastal systems and low-lying areas (henceforth referred to as ‘coasts’) has increased substantially and six important policy-relevant messages have emerged. Coasts are experiencing the adverse consequences of hazards related to climate and sea level (very high confidence). Coasts are highly vulnerable to extreme events, such as storms, which impose substantial costs on coastal societies [6.2.1, 6.2.2, 6.5.2]. Annually, about 120 million people are exposed to tropical cyclone hazards, which killed 250,000 people from 1980 to 2000 [6.5.2]. Through the 20th century, global rise of sea level contributed to increased coastal inundation, erosion and ecosystem losses, but with considerable local and regional variation due to other factors [6.2.5, 6.4.1]. Late 20th century effects of rising temperature include loss of sea ice, thawing of permafrost and associated coastal retreat, and more frequent coral bleaching and mortality [6.2.5]. Coasts will be exposed to increasing risks, including coastal erosion, over coming decades due to climate change and sea-level rise (very high confidence). Anticipated climate-related changes include: an accelerated rise in sea level of up to 0.6 m or more by 2100; a further rise in sea surface temperatures by up to 3°C; an intensification of tropical and extra-tropical cyclones; larger extreme waves and storm surges; altered precipitation/run-off; and ocean acidification [6.3.2]. These phenomena will vary considerably at regional and local scales, but the impacts are virtually certain to be overwhelmingly negative [6.4, 6.5.3]. Corals are vulnerable to thermal stress and have low adaptive capacity. Increases in sea surface temperature of about 1 to 3°C are projected to result in more frequent coral bleaching events and widespread mortality, unless there is thermal adaptation or acclimatisation by corals [Box 6.1, 6.4]. Coastal wetland ecosystems, such as saltmarshes and mangroves, are especially threatened where they are sediment starved or constrained on their landward margin [6.4.1]. Degradation of coastal ecosystems, especially wetlands and coral reefs, has serious implications for the well-being of societies dependent on the coastal ecosystems for goods and services [6.4.2, 6.5.3]. ncreased flooding and the degradation of freshwater, fisheries and other resources could impact hundreds of millions of people, and socio-economic costs on coasts will escalate as a result of climate change [6.4.2, 6.5.3]. The impact of climate change on coasts is exacerbated by increasing human-induced pressures (very high confidence). Utilisation of the coast increased dramatically during the 20th century and this trend is virtually certain to continue through the 21st century. Under the SRES scenarios, the coastal population could grow from 1.2 billion people (in 1990) to 1.8 to 5.2 billion people by the 2080s, depending on assumptions about migration [6.3.1]. Increasing numbers of people and assets at risk at the coast are subject to additional stresses due to land-use and hydrological changes in catchments, including dams that reduce sediment supply to the coast [6.3.2]. Populated deltas (especially Asian megadeltas), low-lying coastal urban areas and atolls are key societal hotspots of coastal vulnerability, occurring where the stresses on natural systems coincide with low human adaptive capacity and high exposure [6.4.3]. Regionally, South, South- East and East Asia, Africa and small islands are most vulnerable [6.4.2]. Climate change therefore reinforces the desirability of managing coasts in an integrated manner [6.6.1.3]. Adaptation for the coasts of developing countries will be more challenging than for coasts of developed countries, due to constraints on adaptive capacity (high confidence). While physical exposure can significantly influence vulnerability for both human populations and natural systems, a lack of adaptive capacity is often the most important factor that creates a hotspot of human vulnerability. Adaptive capacity is largely dependent upon development status. Developing nations may have the political or societal will to protect or relocate people who live in low-lying coastal zones, but without the necessary financial and other resources/capacities, their vulnerability is much greater than that of a developed nation in an identical coastal setting. Vulnerability will also vary between developing countries, while developed countries are not insulated from the adverse consequences of extreme events [6.4.3, 6.5.2]. Adaptation costs for vulnerable coasts are much less than the costs of inaction (high confidence). Adaptation costs for climate change are much lower than damage costs without adaptation for most developed coasts, even considering only property losses and human deaths [6.6.2, 6.6.3]. As post-event impacts on coastal businesses, people, housing, public and private social institutions, natural resources, and the environment generally go unrecognised in disaster cost accounting, the full benefits of adaptation are even larger [6.5.2, 6.6.2]. Without adaptation, the high-end sea-level rise scenarios, combined with other climate changes (e.g., increased storm intensity), are as likely as not to render some islands and lowlying areas unviable by 2100, so effective adaptation is urgently required [6.6.3]. The unavoidability of sea-level rise, even in the longer-term, frequently conflicts with present-day human development patterns and trends (high confidence). Sea-level rise has substantial inertia and will continue beyond 2100 for many centuries. Irreversible breakdown of the West Antarctica and/or Greenland ice sheets, if triggered by rising temperatures, would make this long-term rise significantly larger, ultimately questioning the viability of many coastal settlements across the globe. The issue is reinforced by the increasing human use of the coastal zone. Settlement patterns also have substantial inertia, and this issue presents a challenge for long-term coastal spatial planning. Stabilisation of climate could reduce the risks of ice sheet breakdown, and reduce but Chapter 6 Coastal systems and low-lying areas 317 not stop sea-level rise due to thermal expansion [Box 6.6]. Hence, it is now more apparent than it was in the TAR that the most appropriate response to sea-level rise for coastal areas is a combination of adaptation to deal with the inevitable rise, and mitigation to limit the long-term rise to a manageable level [6.6.5, 6.7].

Book chapter↗
USGS2023

Bayesian hierarchical modeling for probabilistic estimation of tsunami amplitude from far-field earthquake sources

Evaluation of tsunami disaster risk for a coastal region requires reliable estimation of tsunami hazard, for example, wave amplitude close to the shore. Observed tsunami data are scarce and have poor spatial coverage, and for this reason probabilistic tsunami hazard analysis (PTHA) traditionally relies on numerical simulation of “synthetic” tsunami generation and propagation toward the coast. Such an approach has been extensively studied in the past and it is widely recognized as an important disaster-risk mitigation tool. PTHA can not only provide less uncertain and spatially coherent hazard estimates in comparison with classical empirical data analysis which is restricted at the tide gauge stations, but also local inundation information. In this paper, we explore a purely statistical alternative to traditional PTHA for evaluation of tsunami amplitude hazard. Here, we use tide gauge measurements of tsunami amplitude along the western United States, specifically California and Oregon, and develop a spatial Bayesian hierarchical model (BHM) to assess tsunami hazard from far-field earthquake sources at various recurrence intervals. The configuration of our model incorporates latent Gaussian fields that utilize information on the distance between tide gauges as well as on the continental shelf width, that is, a covariate linked to potential dissipative effects on wave energy as the tsunami travels over shallow water. Through our BHM, we produce spatially continuous probabilistic maps of far-field tsunami hazard which can aid comprehensive tsunami disaster risk reduction and management.

California, Oregon, Washington↗
USGS2017

Octocoral diseases in a changing ocean

Octocorals (Cnidaria, Octocorallia) constitute a geographically widely distributed and common group of marine invertebrates commonly referred to as “soft-corals,” “sea fans,” “horny corals,” “sea feathers,” and “sea plumes.” They are found from shallow coastal habitats to mesophotic and abyssal depths. Octocorals are important members of most Atlantic-Caribbean, Indo-Pacific, and Mediterranean coastal and mesophotic reef communities; however, information about their susceptibility to diseases, predation, and competition, and their relationship with changing environmental conditions is limited. At least 19 diseases have been observed in at least 42 common octocoral species throughout their range. Twelve of these have been reported in the wider Caribbean (CA), one in Brazil (BR), two in the Mediterranean (ME), one in the Eastern Pacific (EP), and three in the western Pacific (WP). Pathogenic and/or environmental causes have been identified for eight diseases, including viruses, terrestrial fungi, protozoans, bacteria and cyanobacteria, filamentous algae, parasitic copepods, and high temperature. Only a few of the suspected pathogens have been tested with Koch’s postulates. At least eight disease outbreaks have led to extensive octocoral mortalities in the CA, ME, BR, and EP with detrimental ecological consequences. The fungal disease Aspergillosis has produced the highest mortalities in the CA and the EP. Other fungi, protozoans, and the bacterium Vibrio coralliilyticus were identified as potential causes of the death of millions of colonies in two Mediterranean disease outbreaks. Bacterial and fungal agents seemed to be responsible for the mass mortalities in Brazil and the WP. Most outbreaks in all regions were linked to high thermal anomalies associated with climate change, which seems to be the major driver. Other biological stressors such as predation and/or competition produce injuries that may contribute to the spread of infections and mortality. Overfishing of common predators could lead to population explosions of octocoral-feeding species that produced mass mortalities in some Caribbean localities. Our lack of knowledge of causes and pathogenesis of octocoral diseases parallels that of hard corals. New diseases are being described almost every year concomitant with increasing seawater temperatures. The ecological and economic consequences could be significant, with drastic changes in the seascape of shallow coral reefs and other coastal marine habitats and reduction of their ecological services. Given our limited knowledge, our best options for recovery of octocorals and coral reefs in general include sound management of coastal fisheries, development and tourism; reduction of land- and sea-based pollution; and abating effects of climate change.

Book chapter↗
USGS2012

The United States National Climate Assessment - Alaska Technical Regional Report

The Alaskan landscape is changing, both in terms of effects of human activities as a consequence of increased population, social and economic development and their effects on the local and broad landscape; and those effects that accompany naturally occurring hazards such as volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, and tsunamis. Some of the most prevalent changes, however, are those resulting from a changing climate, with both near term and potential upcoming effects expected to continue into the future. Alaska's average annual statewide temperatures have increased by nearly 4°F from 1949 to 2005, with significant spatial variability due to the large latitudinal and longitudinal expanse of the State. Increases in mean annual temperature have been greatest in the interior region, and smallest in the State's southwest coastal regions. In general, however, trends point toward increases in both minimum temperatures, and in fewer extreme cold days. Trends in precipitation are somewhat similar to those in temperature, but with more variability. On the whole, Alaska saw a 10-percent increase in precipitation from 1949 to 2005, with the greatest increases recorded in winter. The National Climate Assessment has designated two well-established scenarios developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Nakicenovic and others, 2001) as a minimum set that technical and author teams considered as context in preparing portions of this assessment. These two scenarios are referred to as the Special Report on Emissions Scenarios A2 and B1 scenarios, which assume either a continuation of recent trends in fossil fuel use (A2) or a vigorous global effort to reduce fossil fuel use (B1). Temperature increases from 4 to 22°F are predicted (to 2070-2099) depending on which emissions scenario (A2 or B1) is used with the least warming in southeast Alaska and the greatest in the northwest. Concomitant with temperature changes, by the end of the 21st century the growing season is expected to lengthen by 15-25 days in some areas of Alaska, with much of that corresponding with earlier spring snow melt. Future projections of precipitation (30-80 years) over Alaska show an increase across the State, with the largest changes in the northwest and smallest in the southeast. Because of increasing temperatures and growing season length, however, increased precipitation may not correspond with increased water availability, due to temperature related increased evapotranspiration. The extent of snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere has decreased by about 10 percent since the late 1960s, with stronger trends noted since the late 1980s. Alaska has experienced similar trends, with a strong decrease in snow cover extent occurring in May. When averaged across the State, the disappearance of snow in the spring has occurred from 4 to 6 days earlier per decade, and snow return in fall has occurred approximately 2 days later per decade. This change appears to be driven by climate warming rather than a decrease in winter precipitation, with average winter temperatures also increasing by about 2.5°F. The extent of sea ice has been declining, as has been widely published in both national and scientific media outlets, and is projected to continue to decline during this century. The observed decline in annual sea ice minimum extent (September) has occurred more rapidly than was predicted by climate models and has been accompanied by decreases in ice thickness and in the presence of multi-year ice. This decrease was first documented by satellite imagery in the late 1970s for the Bering and Chukchi Seas, and is projected to continue, with the potential for the disappearance of summer sea ice by mid- to late century. A new phenomenon that was not reported in previous assessments is ocean acidification. Uptake of carbon dioxide (CO2) by oceans has a significant effect on marine biogeochemistry by reducing seawater pH. Ocean acidification is of particular concern in Alaska, because cold sea water absorbs CO2 more rapidly than warm water, and a decrease in sea ice extent has allowed increased sea surface exposure and more uptake of CO2 into these northern waters. Ocean acidification will likely affect the ability of organisms to produce and maintain shell material, such as aragonite or calcite (calcium carbonate minerals structured from carbonate ions), required by many shelled organism, from mollusks to corals to microscopic organisms at the base of the food chain. Direct biological effects in Alaska further along the food chain have yet to be studied and may vary among organisms. Some of the potentially most significant changes to Alaska that could result from a changing climate are the effects on the terrestrial cryosphere - particularly glaciers and permafrost. Alaskan glaciers are changing at a rapid rate, the primary driver appearing to be temperature. Statewide, glaciers lost 13 cubic miles of ice annually from the 1950s to the 1990s, and that rate doubled in the 2000s. However, like temperature and precipitation, glacier ice loss is not spatially uniform; most glaciers are losing mass, yet some are growing (for example Hubbard Glacier in southeast Alaska). Alaska glaciers with the most rapid loss are those terminating in sea water or lakes. With this increasing rate of melt, the contribution of surplus fresh water entering into the oceans from Alaska's glaciers, as well as those in neighboring British Columbia, Canada, is approximately 20 percent of that contributed by the Greenland Ice Sheet. Permafrost degradation (that is, the thawing of ice-rich soils) is currently (2012) impacting infrastructure and surface-water availability in areas of both discontinuous and continuous ground ice. Over most of the State, the permafrost is warming, with increasing temperatures broadly consistent with increasing air temperatures. On the Arctic coastal plain of Alaska, permafrost temperatures showed some cooling in the 1950s and 1960s but have been followed by a roughly 5°F increase since the 1980s. Many areas in the continuous permafrost zone have seen increases in temperature in the seasonally active layer and a decrease in re-freezing rates. Changes in the discontinuous permafrost zone are initially much more observable due to the resulting thermokarst terrain (land surface formed as ice rich permafrost thaws), most notable in boreal forested areas. Climate warming in Alaska has potentially broad implications for human health and food security, especially in rural areas, as well as increased risk for injury with changing winter ice conditions. Additionally, such warming poses the potential for increasing damage to existing water and sanitation facilities and challenges for development of new facilities, especially in areas underlain by permafrost. Non-infectious and infectious diseases also are becoming an increasing concern. For example, from 1999 to 2006 there was a statistically significant increase in medical claims for insectbite reactions in five of six regions of Alaska, with the largest percentage increase occurring in the most northern areas. The availability and quality of subsistence foods, normally considered to be very healthy, may change due to changing access, changing habitats, and spoilage of meat in food storage cellars. These and other trends and potential outcomes resulting from a changing climate are further described in this report. In addition, we describe new science leadership activities that have been initiated to address and provide guidance toward conducting research aimed at making available information for policy makers and land management agencies to better understand, address, and plan for changes to the local and regional environment. This report cites data in both metric and standard units due to the contributions by numerous authors and the direct reference of their data.

Alaska↗
USGS2011

Networks - The assessment of marine reserve networks: Guidelines for ecological evaluation

As marine ecosystems are plagued by an ever-increasing suite of threats including climate change, pollution, habitat degradation, and fisheries impacts (Roessig et al ., 2004; Lotze et al ., 2006; Jackson, 2008), there are now no ocean areas that are exempt from anthropogenic impacts (Halpern et al ., 2008). In order to preserve marine biodiversity, ecosystem function, and the goods and services provided by resistant and/or resilient systems, marine reserves have been increasingly recommended as part of an ecosystem-based approach to management (Browman and Stergiou, 2004; Levin et al ., 2009). Marine reserves are defined as “areas of the ocean completely protected from all extractive and destructive activities” (Lubchenco et al ., 2003) and can be experimental controls for evaluating the impact of these activities on marine ecosystems. Growing scientific information has shown consistent increases in species density, biomass, size, and diversity in response to full protection inside reserves of varying sizes and ages located in diverse regions (Claudet et al ., 2008; Lester et al ., 2009; Molloy et al ., 2009). However, most of these data are from individual marine reserves and therefore have inherently limited transferability to networks of marine reserves, which when properly designed can outperform single marine reserves for a variety of ecological, economic, and social management goals (Roberts et al ., 2003; Almany et al ., 2009; Gaines et al ., 2010). The concept of marine reserve networks grew out of a desire to achieve both conservation and fishery management goals by minimizing the potential negative economic, social, and cultural impacts of a single large reserve while still producing similar or even greater ecological and economic returns (Murray et al ., 1999; Gaines et al ., 2010). In addition, reserves networks can provide insurance by protecting areas across a region and spreading the risk that these sites may be impacted by localized catastrophes such as hurricanes or oil spills (Allison et al ., 2003). The World Conservation Union's Marine Programme defines a network as “a collection of individual marine protected areas (MPAs) or reserves operating co-operatively and synergistically, at various spatial scales and with a range of protection levels that are designed to meet objectives that a single reserve cannot achieve” (IUCN–WCPA, 2008). However, general terms such as “co-operatively” and “synergistically” can have myriad meanings. Without a clear definition of a network, it becomes difficult to identify attainable management goals and design a process for evaluating whether the network achieves those goals. Besides, different management goals may in turn result in the need for different types of networks. The use of MPAs with varying protection levels together with no-take zones in multiple-zoning schemes adds another layer of complexity to network design and evaluation; however, partially protected areas are generally used to manage coastal uses and avoid conflicts (rather than for strict ecological purposes) and are therefore a function of the local social, economic, and cultural context. As we are here interested in the ecological effects of networks, for the purposes of this chapter, we focus on marine reserves because these areas are no-take and therefore offer greater ecological benefits than other types of MPAs that allow some forms of extraction (Lester and Halpern, 2008).

Book chapter↗
USGS2014

Demography and behavior of polar bears summering on land in Alaska

Polar bears (Ursus maritimus) in the southern Beaufort Sea population (SB) are spending increased time on the coastal North Slope of Alaska between July and October (Gleason and Rode 2010). The duration spent on land by polar bears, satellite collared on the sea-ice in the spring, during the summer and fall has also increased (USGS, unpublished data; Figure 1). This change in polar bear ecology has relevance for human-bear interactions, subsistence harvest, prevalence of defense kills, and disturbance associated with existing land-based development [e.g., National Petroleum Reserve of Alaska (NPRA), Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR)], Native Alaskan communities, recreation (ANWR) and tourism (e.g., bear viewing in Kaktovik, AK). These activities have the potential to impact, in new ways, the status of the entire SB population. Concomitantly, the change in polar bear ecology will impact these human activities, and a base-line characterization of this phenomenon can better inform mitigation (e.g., industry permitting under the Endangered Species Act and Marine Mammal Protection Act). In this study we aim to characterize the demography, habitat-use, and aspects of foraging ecology and health of polar bears spending fall on land. The SB population is characterized by a divergent-sea ice ecology, where polar bears typically spend most of the year on the sea-ice, even as the pack ice retreats northward, away from the coast, to its minimal extent in September (Amstrup et al. 2008; Durner et al. 2009). From 2000 – 2005, using coastal aerial surveys, Schliebe et al. (2008) observed between 3.7 and 8% of polar bears from SB (~ 60 – 120 of 1526, Regher et al. 2006) on land during the autumn. Sighting probability was not estimated in these surveys, and therefore the numbers represent minimum numbers of bears on land. Our analysis of USGS data suggest an annual average of 15% (± 3%, SE) of polar bears satellite-tagged on the spring-time sea ice (total n = 18 of 124 satellite tags, 2003 – 2009) come to land during July – October. Based on these data, and an assumption that bears satellite-tagged on the spring time sea ice are representative of the entire SB population of independent bears, there would be an average of 230 bears on land each fall. In contrast to the SB population, in five of the world’s 19 polar bear populations (Obbard et al. 2010), polar bears spend significant periods of time on land (1 – 5 months) when ice completely melts. In these seasonal-ice populations (Amstrup et al. 2008), polar bears are largely in a hypophagic condition (e.g., Hobson et al. 2009), relying on fat stores from the spring hyperphagic season, when ringed seals (Phoca hispida) pup. In general, these seasonal-ice populations are demographically productive (Taylor et al. 2005), although recently an increase in the ice-free season has resulted in a population decline in western Hudson Bay (Stirling et al. 1999; Regehr et al. 2007). There have been measured declines in the body condition and productivity of polar bears in SB, and changes in these parameters have been linked to declining optimal ice habitat (e.g., Durner et al. 2009; Regehr et al. 2010). We do not understand the relationship between land-use and the overall status of the population. Individual polar bears that use land may have increased or decreased fitness, in comparison to polar bears that remain on ice in the autumn. This project, which focuses on the biology of animals that spend time on-shore, will help address this question. This project is funded by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) under Agreement No. M09PG00025 and the USGS Outer Continental Shelf Program (OCS) for FY 2009-2014. Parts of this study are also funded by US Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Marine Mammals Management; the Bureau of Land Management; and the North Slope Borough, Department of Wildlife Management. This report is comprehensive, describing results for achieving the overlap

Beaufort Sea, Chukchi Sea↗
USGS2025

Mitigating flood risks in urban estuaries: Tidal dynamics, shoreline hardening, nature-based solutions, and floodgates in San Francisco Bay

Hydrodynamic models are valuable tools for understanding the primary factors influencing daily and peak water levels and for guiding discussions on potential adaptation strategies for managing flood risk in coastal areas. This analysis uses the Delft3D San Francisco Bay-Delta Community Model to simulate water levels and incorporates the effects of a number of adaptation measures in the urban San Francisco Bay estuary, California. In particular, we examine the influence of shoreline hardening, nature-based solutions, and subregional floodgates on regional water levels. The result shows that under present conditions, tidal amplification is responsible for generating a wide distribution of extreme water levels across San Francisco Bay. Tidal amplification is found to decrease under sea level rise, thereby producing a relative damping effect on extremes. A comparison of different shoreline scenarios demonstrates that hard frontal shorelines result in higher tidal amplification, whereas restored (soft) shorelines lower amplification. The current shoreline configuration has both hard and soft characteristics and results in an intermediate tidal response. In some areas, wetland restoration reduces extreme water levels by as much as 20 cm, whereas hard-shoreline addition elevates them by as much as 10 cm for 1.5 m of sea level rise. Furthermore, local floodgates can significantly reduce high water levels without major adverse effects elsewhere in San Francisco Bay. These findings point toward the justification for a range of adaptive measures across political boundaries, weighing hard and soft options in addressing the mounting danger of sea level rise.

California↗
USGS2008

Variations in Community Exposure and Sensitivity to Tsunami Hazards on the Open-Ocean and Strait of Juan de Fuca Coasts of Washington

Evidence of past events and modeling of potential future events suggest that tsunamis are significant threats to communities on the open-ocean and Strait of Juan de Fuca coasts of Washington. Although potential tsunami-inundation zones from a Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) earthquake have been delineated, the amount and type of human development in tsunami-prone areas have not been documented. A vulnerability assessment using geographic-information-system tools was conducted to document variations in developed land, human populations, economic assets, and critical facilities relative to CSZ-related tsunami-inundation zones among communities on the open-ocean and Strait of Juan de Fuca coasts of Washington (including Clallam, Jefferson, Grays Harbor, and Pacific Counties). The tsunami-inundation zone in these counties contains 42,972 residents (24 percent of the total study-area population), 24,934 employees (33 percent of the total labor force), and 17,029 daily visitors to coastal Washington State Parks. The tsunami-inundation zone also contains 2,908 businesses that generate $4.6 billion in annual sales volume (31 and 40 percent of study-area totals, respectively) and tax parcels with a combined total value of $4.5 billion (25 percent of the study-area total). Although occupancy values are not known for each site, the tsunami-inundation zone also contains numerous dependent-population facilities (for example, schools and child-day-care centers), public venues (for example, religious organizations), and critical facilities (for example, police stations and public-work facilities). Racial diversity of residents in tsunami-prone areas is low?89 percent of residents are White and 8 percent are American Indian or Alaska Native. Nineteen percent of the residents in the tsunami-inundation zone are over 65 years in age, 30 percent of the residents live on unincorporated county lands, and 35 percent of the households are renter occupied. Employees in the tsunami-inundation zone are largely in businesses related to health care and social assistance, accommodation and food services, and retail trade, reflecting businesses that cater to a growing retiree and tourist population. Community vulnerability, described here by exposure (the amount of assets in tsunami-prone areas) and sensitivity (the relative percentage of assets in tsunami-prone areas) varies among 13 incorporated cities, 7 Indian reservations, and 4 counties. The City of Aberdeen has the highest relative community exposure to tsunamis, whereas the City of Long Beach has the highest relative community sensitivity. Levels of community exposure and sensitivity to tsunamis are found to be related to the amount and percentage, respectively, of a community?s land that is in a tsunami-inundation zone. This report will further the dialogue on societal risk to tsunami hazards in Washington and help risk managers to determine where additional risk-reduction strategies may be needed.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2019

Managing effects of drought and other water resource challenges in Alaska and the Pacific Northwest

This is a Cooperator Report. As such, there is no specific abstract. The physical, ecological, and social environments of Alaska and the Pacific Northwest (PNW) region of the United States are extremely diverse. Alaska ranges from the Arctic Ocean and the very cold, dry environments of the North Slope to the cool and very rainy coastal North Pacific region of Southeast Alaska. Most precipitation falls as snow at higher elevations. In Arctic Alaska, average annual temperature is 14.6 F, and average annual precipitation is 11 inches. By contrast, in Southeast Alaska, average annual temperature is 35.8 F, and annual average precipitation is 143 inches. The PNW, defined here as Idaho, Oregon, and Washington, ranges from the Pacific Coast (annual precipitation of 200 inches) to interior semi-arid regions (annual precipitation of 8 inches). Precipitation patterns in the PNW are strongly governed by orographic phenomena, with high, persistent snowpack in the higher mountains (e.g., record annual snowfall of 1,130 in at Mount Baker, Washington in 1999-2000). Ecosystems in the PNW include productive temperate coniferous forests near the Pacific coast and along the (wet) west slope of the Cascade Range, less productive mixed-conifer forest along the (dry) east slope of the Cascades and in interior mountain ranges, and sagebrush-steppe and shrublands at lower elevations in much of the interior and mountain valleys. Large rivers and thousands of smaller tributaries form an extensive network of riparian, wetland, and estuarine systems that provide both critical hydrologic function and biological diversity at broad and fine spatial scales. Although Alaska and the Pacific Northwest differ in important physical, ecological, and social features, the importance of natural resources is evident in both regions. Water is important for wildlife and people. Water provides critical habitat for salmon, which are culturally and economically valuable species. Timber production has declined in recent decades. Recreation has emerged as a major revenue source.

Alaska, Oregon, Washington↗
USGS2023

Monitoring and modeling dispersal of a submerged nearshore berm at the mouth of the Columbia River, USA

A submerged, low-relief nearshore berm was constructed in the Pacific Ocean near the mouth of the Columbia River, USA, using 216,000 m 3 of sediment dredged from the adjacent navigation channel. The material dredged from the navigation channel was placed on the northern flank of the ebb-tidal delta in water depths between 12 and 15 m and created a distinct feature that could be tracked over time. Field measurements and numerical modeling were used to evaluate the transport pathways, time scales, and physical processes responsible for dispersal of the berm and evaluate the suitability of the location for operational placement of dredged material to enhance the sediment supply to eroding beaches onshore of the placement site. Repeated multibeam bathymetric surveys characterized the initial berm morphology and dispersion of the berm between September 22, 2020, and March 10, 2021. During this time, the volume of sediment within the berm decreased by about 40%to 127,000 m 3 , the maximum height decreased by almost 60%, and the center of the deposit shifted onshore over 200 m. Observations of berm morphology were compared with predictions from a three-dimensional hydrodynamic and sediment transport model application to refine poorly constrained model input parameters including sediment transport coefficients, bed schematization, and grain size. The calibrated sediment transport model was used to predict the amount, timing, and direction of transport outside of the observed survey area. Model simulations predicted that tidal currents were weak in the vicinity of the berm and wave processes including enhanced bottom stresses and asymmetric bottom orbital velocities resulted in dominant onshore movement of sediment from the berm toward the coastline. Roughly 50% of the berm volume was predicted to disperse away from the initial placement site during the 169 day hindcast. Between 9 and 17% of the initial volume of the berm was predicted to accumulate along the shoreface of a shoreline reach experiencing chronic erosion directly onshore of the placement site. Scenarios exploring alternate placement locations suggested that the berm was relatively effective in enhancing the sediment supply along the eroding coastline north of the inlet. The transferable monitoring and modeling framework developed in this study can be used to inform implementation of strategic nearshore placements and regional sediment management in complex, high-energy coastal environments elsewhere.

Oregon, Washington↗
USGS2009

Evaluation of a gastric radio tag insertion technique for anadromous river herring

Anadromous river herring (alewives Alosa pseudoharengus and blueback herring A. aestivalis ), which constitute a historically and ecologically important component of coastal rivers, have declined precipitously throughout the Atlantic seaboard. Suggested causes of river herring decline include commercial fishing and predation by striped bass Morone saxatilis . Although the causes of this recent trend are poorly understood, river herring are especially vulnerable to adverse impacts during their spring spawning migration. Radiotelemetry is an especially useful method for addressing potential problems encountered during the movement of these fish from the ocean to freshwater. In spite of frequent calls for evaluation of telemetry methods, controlled tests of posttagging effects are rare for alosids and virtually nonexistent for anadromous river herring. We developed a protocol for gastric tagging of anadromous river herring, and we used hatchery and field studies to evaluate behavior, tag placement, stress response, and posttagging mortality. We also compared tagger effects and quantified posttagging upstream movements of fish in the field. In controlled hatchery trials, no fish died at 10 min, 1 h, or 14 d posttagging. No tags were rejected, and only 1 of 35 tags ruptured the gut. In field cages, mortality, plasma cortisol, glucose, and chloride measured at 24 h were similar between tagged and untagged fish. In the field, 12 of 14 fish moved upriver after tagging and spent 114 h on average at upriver sites. Using a variety of approaches, we found no evidence that our tagging protocol adversely affected river herring in comparison with untagged fish that were subjected only to handling and holding. Our protocol, evaluated by comparing responses of tagged and untagged fish under controlled conditions, may be useful in future studies that seek to understand causes of decline for anadromous river herring.

Massachuetts↗
USGS2021

Disentangling stationary and dynamic estuarine fish habitat to inform conservation: Species-specific responses to physical habitat and water quality in San Francisco Estuary

Estuaries represent critical aquatic habitat that connects surface water distributed between Earth’s landmasses and oceans. They are dynamic transitional ecosystems, which provide important habitat for fishes and other aquatic organisms. Effective conservation of species inhabiting estuaries requires knowledge of the habitat features that drive their abundance and distribution. We sought to elucidate how stationary (i.e., wetlands, shoals, and channels) and dynamic (i.e., salinity, temperature, turbidity, and chlorophyll concentration) habitat features interact to drive distributions of individual fish species. The Pacific coast of the conterminous United States has over 400 estuaries of various types. The largest (historical surface area) is San Francisco Estuary, California. We conducted extensive field observations of fishes in the central San Francisco Estuary among stationary habitat types (i.e., wetland, shoal, and channel) over a 19-month period encompassing substantial variability in dynamic water quality conditions. Most of the species observed, especially native species of special management interest, were associated with tidal wetland habitat. Few species exhibited associations with water quality conditions driven by seasonal (temperature) or a combination of broad- and fine-scale ecosystem processes (salinity and turbidity). Our study provides (1) an empirical demonstration of how researchers can deal with the complex and dynamic expressions of habitat in estuarine systems to address urgent natural resource problems and (2) a clear demonstration of the urgent need for habitat restoration and its likely outcome in systems such as San Francisco Estuary. Restoration of suitable tidal wetland habitat on the West Coast of the United States is likely to be an effective conservation tool to support estuarine fishes given that over 90% of historical tidal wetland habitat in San Francisco Estuary and 85% of vegetated wetland habitat along the Pacific coast of the United States has been lost due to human modification.

California↗
USGS2016

California State Waters Map Series — Offshore of Monterey, California

Introduction In 2007, the California Ocean Protection Council initiated the California Seafloor Mapping Program (CSMP), designed to create a comprehensive seafloor map of high-resolution bathymetry, marine benthic habitats, and geology within the 3-nautical-mile limit of California’s State Waters. The CSMP approach is to create highly detailed seafloor maps through collection, integration, interpretation, and visualization of swath bathymetry data, acoustic backscatter, seafloor video, seafloor photography, high-resolution seismic-reflection profiles, and bottom-sediment sampling data. The map products display seafloor morphology and character, identify potential marine benthic habitats, and illustrate both the surficial seafloor geology and shallow subsurface geology. The Offshore of Monterey map area in central California is located on the Pacific Coast, about 120 km south of San Francisco. Incorporated cities in the map area include Seaside, Monterey, Marina, Pacific Grove, Carmel-by-the-Sea, and Sand City. The local economy receives significant resources from tourism, as well as from the Federal Government. Tourist attractions include the Monterey Bay Aquarium, Cannery Row, Fisherman’s Wharf, and the many golf courses near Pebble Beach, and the area serves as a gateway to the spectacular scenery and outdoor activities along the Big Sur coast to the south. Federal facilities include the Army’s Defense Language Institute, the Naval Postgraduate School, and the Fleet Numerical Meteorology and Oceanography Center (operated by the Navy). In 1994, Fort Ord army base, located between Seaside and Marina, was closed; much of former army base land now makes up the Fort Ord National Monument, managed by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management as part of the National Landscape Conservation System. In addition, part of the old Fort Ord is now occupied by California State University, Monterey Bay. The offshore part of the map area lies entirely within the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary, one of the nation’s largest marine sanctuaries. State beaches and parks within the map area include Fort Ord Dunes State Park and the Marina, Monterey, and Asilomar State Beaches, as well as Carmel River State Beach, which includes the Carmel River Lagoon and Wetland Natural Preserve. The map area also includes all or part of several State Marine Protected Areas, including the Carmel Pinnacles, Asilomar, and Lovers Point–Julia Platt State Marine Reserves, as well as the Carmel Bay, Pacific Grove Marine Gardens, Edward F. Ricketts, and Portuguese Ledge State Marine Conservation Areas. The coastal zone in the map area is characterized by two distinct physiographies. From Marina to Monterey, sandy beaches are backed by a belt of sand dunes, as much as 30 to 40 m high and as wide as 8 km. The Salinas River supplies the sand for the beaches and dunes. Nearshore sediment transport is primarily to the south, in the southern Monterey littoral cell. Along the Monterey peninsula, which lies at the north end of the rugged Santa Lucia Range, coastal relief is very different. The peninsula is characterized largely by low marine terraces that formed mostly on hard and relatively stable granitic bedrock. Carmel Beach in Carmel-by-the-Sea is the longest continuous beach in this area; bedrock points and small pocket beaches characterize most of the rest of the peninsula. The Carmel River littoral cell extends along the coast from Point Pinos to Point Lobos (just south of the map area), including Carmel Beach; sediment transport is primarily to the south. The granitic rocks that crop out so prominently along the Monterey peninsula make up part of the Salinian block, a crustal terrane that in this area lies west of the San Andreas Fault and east of the San Gregorio Fault. The strike-slip San Andreas Fault Zone, which lies just 26 km east of the map area, is the most important structure within the Pacific–North American transform plate boundary. The San Gregorio Fault, a secondary fault within the distributed plate boundary, cuts through (and is roughly aligned with) Carmel Canyon, a submarine canyon in the southwest corner of the map area that is part of the Monterey Canyon system. The San Gregorio Fault Zone is part of a fault system that is present predominantly in the offshore for about 400 km, from Point Conception in the south (where it is known as the Hosgri Fault) to Bolinas and Point Reyes in the north. The offshore part of the map area primarily consists of relatively flat continental shelf, bounded on the west by the steep flanks of Carmel Canyon. Shelf width varies from 2 to 3 km in the southern part of the map area, near the mouth of Carmel Canyon, to 14 km in Monterey Bay. Bedrock beneath the shelf is overlain in many areas by variable amounts (0 to 16 m) of upper Quaternary shelf and nearshore sediments deposited as sea level fluctuated in the late Pleistocene. “Soft-induration,” unconsolidated sediment is the dominant (about 63 percent) habitat type on the continental shelf, followed by “hard-induration” rock and boulders (about 34 percent) and “mixed-induration” substrate (about 3 percent). At water depths of about 100 to 130 m, the shelf break approximates the shoreline during the sea-level lowstand of the Last Glacial Maximum, about 21,000 years ago. Carmel Canyon and other parts of the Monterey Canyon system in the map area extend from the shelf break to water depths that reach 1,600 m. Most of the extensive incision of the shelf break and canyon flanks probably occurred during repeated Quaternary sea-level lowstands. The relatively straight floor of Carmel Canyon notably is aligned with the San Gregorio Fault Zone. Mixed hard-soft substrate is the most common (about 51 percent) habitat type in Carmel Canyon; hard bedrock and soft, unconsolidated sediment cover about 40 percent and 9 percent of canyon habitat, respectively. This part of the central California coast is exposed to large North Pacific swells from the northwest throughout the year. Wave heights range from 2 to 10 m, the larger swells occurring from October to May. During El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) events, winter storms track farther south than they do in normal (non-ENSO) years, thereby impacting the map area more frequently and with waves of larger heights. Benthic species observed in the map area are natives of the cold-temperate biogeographic zone that is called either the “Oregonian province” or the “northern California ecoregion.” This biogeographic province is maintained by the long-term stability of the southward-flowing California Current, the eastern limb of the North Pacific subtropical gyre that flows from southern British Columbia to Baja California. Biological productivity resulting from coastal upwelling supports populations of Sooty Shearwater, Western Gull, Common Murre, Cassin’s Auklet, and many other less populous bird species. An observable recovery of Humpback and Blue Whales has occurred in the area; both species are dependent on coastal upwelling to provide nutrients. The large extent of exposed inner shelf bedrock supports large forests of “bull kelp,” which is well adapted for high-wave-energy environments. The kelp beds are well-known habitat for the population of southern sea otters. Common fish species found in the kelp beds and rocky reefs include lingcod and various species of rockfish and greenling.

California↗
USGS2023

Data-limited fishery assessment methods shed light on the exploitation history and population dynamics of Endangered Species Act-listed Yelloweye Rockfish in Puget Sound, Washington

Objective The distinct population segment (DPS) of Yelloweye Rockfish Sebastes ruberrimus inhabiting the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin was listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 2010, and a formal recovery plan for the DPS was published by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries in 2017. In this recovery plan, the biological criteria for delisting or downlisting were specified as certain levels of spawning potential ratio (SPR), a commonly used metric of equilibrium stock status for commercially exploited fishes. Although this metric can be estimated from length compositions, the combination of length data with a catch history (which was not previously available for this DPS) improves our understanding of population dynamics over time and allows us to estimate a different measure of stock status, relative (to unfished) spawning stock biomass (SSB), rather than only SPR. Methods To estimate relative SSB and reconstruct the historical dynamics of this DPS, we reconstructed the catch history from fisheries records, collated length data from historical and contemporary hook-and-line surveys, and fitted a data-limited version of a statistical catch-at-age model. Result Despite a high level of uncertainty, we estimated that Yelloweye Rockfish in Puget Sound are above 25% of unfished biomass (a reference point detailed in the recovery criteria) under the assumption of deterministic recruitment, presenting the first direct estimates of Yelloweye Rockfish population status in Puget Sound. Conclusion However, as informed by recent genetic studies, the DPS boundaries of ESA-listed Yelloweye Rockfish extend from South Puget Sound to Queen Charlotte Strait in British Columbia. The Canadian portion of this population is managed separately and is currently estimated to be at 32% of unfished biomass (95% quantiles = 15%–68%). Thus, the disjunction between the biological boundaries of the population and the jurisdictional boundaries between Canada and the United States presents an additional source of uncertainty in assessing recovery that must be addressed to achieve DPS-wide recovery goals.

Washington↗
USGS2016

Influence of basin- and local-scale environmental conditions on nearshore production in the northeast Pacific Ocean

Nearshore marine habitats are productive and vulnerable owing to their connections to pelagic and terrestrial landscapes. To understand how ocean basin- and local-scale conditions may influence nearshore species, we developed an annual index of nearshore production (spanning the period 1972–2010) from growth increments recorded in otoliths of representative pelagic-feeding (Black Rockfish Sebastes melanops ) and benthic-feeding (Kelp Greenling Hexagrammos decagrammus ) nearshore-resident fishes at nine sites in the California Current and Alaska Coastal Current systems. We explored the influence of basin- and local-scale conditions across all seasons at lags of up to 2 years to represent changes in prey quantity (1- or 2-year time lags) and quality (within-year relationships). Relationships linking fish growth to basin-scale (Pacific Decadal Oscillation, North Pacific Gyre Oscillation, and multivariate El Niño–Southern Oscillation index) and local-scale (sea surface temperature, sea surface height anomalies, upwelling index, photosynthetically active radiation, and freshwater discharge) environmental conditions varied by species and current system. Growth of Black Rockfish increased with cool basin-scale conditions in the California Current and warm local-scale conditions in the Alaska Coastal Current, consistent with existing hypotheses linking climate to pelagic production on continental shelves in the respective regions. Relationships for Kelp Greenlings in the California Current were complex, with faster growth related to within-year warm conditions and lagged-year cool conditions. These opposing, lag-dependent relationships may reflect differences in conditions that promote quantity versus quality of benthic invertebrate prey in the California Current. Thus, we hypothesize that benthic production is maximized by alternating cool and warm years, as benthic invertebrate recruitment is food limited during warm years while growth is temperature limited by cool years in the California Current. On the other hand, Kelp Greenlings grew faster during and subsequent to warm conditions at basin and local scales in the Alaska Coastal Current.

Marine and Coastal Fisheries: Dynamics, Management↗
USGS2015

California State Waters Map Series — Offshore of Bodega Head, California

Introduction In 2007, the California Ocean Protection Council initiated the California Seafloor Mapping Program (CSMP), designed to create a comprehensive seafloor map of high-resolution bathymetry, marine benthic habitats, and geology within the 3-nautical-mile limit of California’s State Waters. The CSMP approach is to create highly detailed seafloor maps through collection, integration, interpretation, and visualization of swath sonar data, acoustic backscatter, seafloor video, seafloor photography, high-resolution seismic-reflection profiles, and bottom-sediment sampling data. The map products display seafloor morphology and character, identify potential marine benthic habitats, and illustrate both the surficial seafloor geology and shallow subsurface geology. The Offshore of Bodega Head map area is located in northern California, about 70 km north of San Francisco and about 80 km south of Point Arena. The onshore part of the map area is largely undeveloped, used primarily for recreation, farms and ranches, and a few wineries. The small town of Bodega Bay, located on the east side of Bodega Harbor, is the largest cultural center. Bodega Harbor is an important commercial fishing base and, in season, an active sport fishing and recreation harbor. Much of the coastline from Bodega Head north to about 6 km north of the Russian River is part of Sonoma Coast State Park. The Offshore of Bodega Head map area includes two California Marine Protected Areas, the Bodega Head State Marine Reserve and the northern part of the Bodega Head State Marine Conservation Area. Additionally, the inland parts of two large estuaries in the map area, Estero Americano and Estero de San Antonio, have been designated as State Marine Recreational Management Areas. The map area is cut by the northwest-striking San Andreas Fault, the right-lateral transform boundary between the North American and Pacific plates. This fault juxtaposes rocks of the Jurassic and Cretaceous Franciscan Complex on the northeast with Cretaceous granitic rocks on the southwest, and it has an estimated slip rate of about 17 to 25 mm/yr in this area. The devastating great 1906 California earthquake (M7.8) is thought to have nucleated on the San Andreas Fault offshore of San Francisco, about 80 km south of Bodega Head, with the rupture extending northward through the Offshore of Bodega Head map area and an additional 220 km to the south flank of Cape Mendocino. North of the mouth of Salmon Creek, the coast and shoreline are rugged and scenic, characterized by flights of uplifted marine terraces, rocky promontories, nearshore sea stacks, kelp-rich coves, and both pocket beaches and longer beach strands, the latter of which include Wrights Beach and Portuguese Beach. The coast has lower relief between the mouth of Salmon Creek and Mussel Point, where South Salmon Creek Beach is backed by a large (about 4 km 2 ) complex of coastal sand dunes. The enormous volume of sand on the beach and in the dune field is derived by southward littoral drift from the Russian River, Salmon Creek, and smaller coastal watersheds. The sediment is trapped by protruding bedrock at Mussel Point, which represents the south end of the Russian River littoral cell. Bodega Head is underlain by Cretaceous granitic rocks, and its shoreline is variously characterized by relatively low-lying terraces, steep and high bluffs, and a few pocket beaches. East of Bodega Head, Doran Beach (part of Doran Regional Park) is a 1.7-km-long sand spit that forms the north boundary of Bodega Bay and the south boundary of Bodega Harbor. The coast south of Doran Beach on the east flank of Bodega Bay is composed of rocky bluffs, hummocky marine terraces, and a few small pocket beaches. The bluffs are underlain by sheared rocks of the Franciscan Complex and are highly susceptible to landslides. This section of coast includes two prominent watersheds, Estero Americano and Estero de San Antonio, which drain westward into Bodega Bay. The offshore part of the Offshore of Bodega Head map area is characterized by an extensive, rugged and rocky shelf underlain by Cretaceous granitic rocks. This rocky terrain, centered offshore of Bodega Head, extends northwestward for about 15 km, from the south edge of the map area (where it forms the west boundary of Bodega Bay) to the northern-central part of the map area offshore of the mouth of Salmon Creek. This rocky seafloor reaches water depths of 40 to 80 m and is overlain by young sediment. Circulation over the shelf and seafloor in the map area (and in the broader central California region) is dominated by the southward-flowing California Current, the eastern boundary current of the North Pacific Gyre. Associated upwelling brings cool, nutrient-rich waters to the surface, resulting in high biological productivity. Persistent northwest winds are sometimes weak or absent during the fall and winter, causing the California Current to move farther offshore so that the shelf is affected by the Davidson Current, a weaker northward-flowing countercurrent. As a result, net flow over the continental shelf is commonly southeastward during the spring and summer and northwestward during the fall and winter. Throughout the year, this part of the northern California coast is exposed to four wave climate regimes: the north Pacific swell, the southern swell, northwest wind waves, and local wind waves. The north Pacific swell dominates in winter months (typically November through March). During summer months, the largest waves come from the southern swell, generated by storms in the south Pacific and offshore of Central America. Northwest wind waves affect the coast throughout the year, whereas local wind waves are most common from October to April. Potential marine benthic habitats in the Offshore of Bodega Head map area include unconsolidated continental-shelf sediments, mixed continental-shelf substrate, and hard continental-shelf substrate. Rocky-shelf outcrops and rubble are considered to be promising potential habitats for rockfish and lingcod, both of which are recreationally and commercially important species.

California↗
USGS2015

U.S. Geological Survey Chesapeake science strategy, 2015-2025—Informing ecosystem management of America’s largest estuary

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has the critical role of providing scientific information to improve the understanding and management of the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem. The USGS works with Federal, State, and academic science partners to provide research and monitoring, and communicate results of these activities to enhance ecosystem management for both the Chesapeake and other National ecosystems. The USGS Chesapeake Science Strategy was prepared to guide science activities to address the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement (2014–2025), to support the Department of the Interior (DOI) involvement in the Bay restoration efforts, and align with the USGS Mission Area (MA) Science strategies. The Chesapeake Bay is our Nation’s largest estuary, and provides critical goods and services to the people, fish, and wildlife that use the 64,000-square-mile watershed. The Chesapeake Bay watershed contains over 3,600 species of fish, wildlife, and plants and provides spawning grounds for many ecologically and economically important species including striped bass and blue crabs. The Bay watershed lies in the heart of the Atlantic Flyway and has 29 species of waterfowl, about 1 million of which winter in the region. The size of the Chesapeake seafood harvest is third in the Nation, only behind the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Along with agricultural production, tourism, and recreation, the estimated economic value of the services from the Chesapeake Bay watershed is about $100 billion annually. However, the health of the Bay ecosystem began to decline at the beginning of the 20th century due to overfishing and increasing human population and associated land change. The Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) is the Federal-State cooperative effort that started in 1983 to restore the Bay and watershed. Given the ecological and economic importance of the Chesapeake ecosystem, President Obama issued an Executive Order (EO) in 2009 for increased Federal leadership in the CBP to enhance the pace of restoration, and the supporting strategy was released in 2010. The EO directed the Federal Government, including the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), represented by the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS), and the USGS, to expand its efforts and increase leadership to restore the Bay and its watershed. The USGS and other Federal agencies expanded their activities in 2011 to meet the President’s Chesapeake EO. Since the EO was released, there have been several important changes in the USGS, DOI, and the CBP including: (1) the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement, (2) increased DOI leadership in the CBP, and (3) the release of the USGS MA science strategies. The EO strategy served as a foundation for the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement that was signed in 2014 by the CBP Partners, and has goals and outcomes to be met by 2025. The USGS developed the Chesapeake Science Strategy to guide our activities to address the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement, DOI leadership in the CBP, and USGS MA strategies. Improving the understanding of fish and wildlife population and health, and the factors affecting their condition is the emphasis of the Strategy. The science focuses on documenting the critical ecosystem connections in the Chesapeake, and providing implications to enhance decision making for restoration and conservation activities. The revised Strategy has four themes that address 7 of the 10 goals in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement: Enhance science to support restoration, and conservation of fish, wildlife, and critical habitats. Characterize and explain changes in water quality, and its effect on freshwater and estuarine ecosystems. Assess and forecast effects of climate and land change on ecosystem conditions. Synthesize and provide information to support ecosystem management. The structure and function of biological communities of the Bay and its watershed are extremely complex and are affected by a variety of stressors and conditions. To better define the issues being addressed, the USGS has developed cross-cutting questions that define some of the most important scientific challenges where multiple disciplines and collaborators are needed to address an issue. The initial questions include: How do land and climate changes affect freshwater fish communities, health, and habitats? What are the relations among land use, water quality, contaminants, and the health of fish and wildlife? How are coastal wetlands and their carrying capacity for waterbirds affected by changing climate and land use? How is the water quality of rivers and estuaries responding to restoration actions, and changing land use? What are some of the best opportunities for management actions to benefit multiple restoration outcomes?

Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virgin↗