Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Environmental Research: Ecology”

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 307 records · Page 17Linked to original sources
USGS2012

USGS Environmental health science strategy: providing environmental health science for a changing world: Public review release

America has an abundance of natural resources. We have bountiful clean water, fertile soil, and unrivaled national parks, wildlife refuges, and public lands. These resources enrich our lives and preserve our health and wellbeing. These resources have been maintained because of our history of respect for their value and an enduring commitment to their vigilant protection. Awareness of the social, economic, and personal value of the health of our environment is increasing. The emergence of environmentally driven diseases caused by environmental exposure to contaminants and pathogens is a growing concern worldwide. New health threats and patterns of established threats are affected by both natural and anthropogenic changes to the environment. Human activities are key drivers of emerging (new and re-emerging) health threats. Societal demands for land and natural resources, a better quality of life, improved economic prosperity, and the environmental impacts associated with these demands will continue to increase. Natural earth processes, climate trends, and related climatic events will add to the environmental impact of human activities. These environmental drivers will influence exposure to disease agents, including viral, bacterial, prion, and fungal pathogens, parasites, natural earth materials, toxins and other biogenic compounds, and synthetic chemicals and substances. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) defines environmental health science broadly as the interdisciplinary study of relations among the quality of the physical environment, the health of the living environment, and human health. The interactions among these three spheres are driven by human activities, ecological processes, and natural earth processes; the interactions affect exposure to contaminants and pathogens and the severity of environmentally driven diseases in animals and people. This definition provides USGS with a framework for synthesizing natural science information from across the Bureau and providing it to environmental, natural resource, agricultural, and public-health managers. The USGS is a Federal science agency with a broad range of natural science expertise relevant to environmental health. USGS provides scientific information and tools as a scientific basis for management and policy decision making. USGS specializes in science at the environment-health interface, by characterizing the processes that affect the interaction among the physical environment, the living environment, and people, and the resulting factors that affect ecological and human exposure to disease agents. This report describes a 10-year strategy that encompasses the portfolio of USGS environmental health science. It summarizes national environmental health priorities that USGS is best suited to address, and will serve as a strategic framework for USGS environmental health science goals, actions, and outcomes for the next decade. Implementation of this strategy is intended to aid coordination of USGS environmental health activities and to provide a focal point for disseminating information to stakeholders. The "One Health" paradigm advocated by the World Health Organization (WHO, 2011), and the American Veterinary Medicine Association (AVMA, 2008), among others, is based on a general recognition that the health of humans, animals, and the environment are inextricably linked. Thus, successful efforts to protect that health will require increased interdisciplinary research and increased communication and collaboration among the broader scientific and health community. This strategy is built upon that paradigm. The vision, mission, and five cornerstone goals of the USGS Environmental Health Science Strategy were developed with significant input from a wide range of stakeholders. Vision - The USGS is a premier source of the environmental health science needed to safeguard the health of the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. Mission - The mission of USGS in environmental health science is to contribute scientific information to environmental, natural resource, agricultural, and public-health managers, who use that science to support sound decision making. USGS provides the science to: - Goal 1: Identify, prioritize, and detect contaminants and pathogens of emerging environmental concern. - Goal 2: Reduce the impact of contaminants on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Goal 3: Reduce the impact of pathogens on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Goal 4: Discover the complex interactions and combined effects of exposure to contaminants and pathogens. - Goal 5: Prepare for and respond to environmental impacts and related health threats of natural and anthropogenic disasters. Goals 1 through 4 are intended to provide science to address environmental health threats in a logical order, from informing prevention and preparedness, to supporting systematic management response to environmental health issues. Goal 4 addresses the interaction among contaminants and pathogens, an issue of emerging concern in environmental health science. Goal 5 acknowledges the fact that natural and anthropogenic disasters can cause immediate and prolonged adverse environmental health threats. This strategy proposes that USGS take the following strategic science actions to achieve each of the five goals of this strategy: Goal 1: Identify, prioritize, and detect contaminants and pathogens of emerging environmental concern. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Prioritize contaminants and pathogens of emerging concern to guide research, detection, and management activities. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Conduct surveillance and monitoring to provide early warning of emerging health threats. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Develop approaches and tools that identify vulnerable environmental settings, ecosystems, and species. Goal 2: Reduce the impact of contaminants on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Systematically characterize the sources, occurrence, transport and fate of environmental contaminants to guide efforts to manage and mitigate contamination. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Evaluate the threats of contamination on the health of the environment, fish, wildlife, and people, and inform the associated management and protection efforts. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Characterize potential human exposure to support establishment of health-based standards or guidelines and contamination-reduction efforts. Goal 3: Reduce the impact of pathogens on the environment, fish, wildlife, and people. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Determine the biotic and abiotic factors that control the ecology of infectious diseases affecting natural populations of aquatic and terrestrial species and potential transmission to other animals and humans. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Establish how natural and anthropogenic environmental changes affect the distribution and severity of infectious diseases in natural populations of aquatic and terrestrial species and potential transmission to other animals and humans. - Strategic Science Action 3. - Develop surveillance systems to identify changing patterns of disease activity in priority geographic areas. Goal 4: Discover the complex interactions and combined effects of exposure to contaminants and pathogens. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Identify how exposure to one class of disease agents (contaminants or pathogens) can make an organism more susceptible to effects from exposure to the other class of disease agents. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Implement interdisciplinary studies that characterize the effects of combined exposure to pathogens and contaminants. Goal 5: Prepare for and respond to the environmental impacts and related health threats of natural and anthropogenic disasters. - Strategic Science Action 1. - Establish a formal interdisciplinary science capability to rapidly assess the environmental health risks associated with disasters. - Strategic Science Action 2. - Enhance methods to anticipate, prepare for, and identify environmental, ecological, and related health impacts of future disasters. This strategy is one of seven USGS science strategies developed concurrently: - Climate and Land Use Change - Core Science Systems - Ecosystems - Energy and Mineral Resources - Environmental Health - Natural Hazards - Water. This strategy describes how USGS will address the highest priority environmental health issues facing the Nation. The ultimate intended outcome of this science strategy is prevention and reduction of adverse impacts to the quality of the environment, the health of our living resources, and human health. Communication with, and receiving input from, partners and stakeholders regarding their science needs is essential for successful implementation of this strategy. It is incumbent on USGS to reach out to all stakeholders to ensure that USGS efforts are focused on the highest priority environmental health issues and that products are provided in the most timely and usable form to all those who can use them. USGS must reach out to the scientific community, internally and externally, to ensure that our efforts are integrated with and take full advantage of the activities of others.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2018

Iterative near-term ecological forecasting: Needs, opportunities, and challenges

Two foundational questions about sustainability are “How are ecosystems and the services they provide going to change in the future?” and “How do human decisions affect these trajectories?” Answering these questions requires an ability to forecast ecological processes. Unfortunately, most ecological forecasts focus on centennial-scale climate responses, therefore neither meeting the needs of near-term (daily to decadal) environmental decision-making nor allowing comparison of specific, quantitative predictions to new observational data, one of the strongest tests of scientific theory. Near-term forecasts provide the opportunity to iteratively cycle between performing analyses and updating predictions in light of new evidence. This iterative process of gaining feedback, building experience, and correcting models and methods is critical for improving forecasts. Iterative, near-term forecasting will accelerate ecological research, make it more relevant to society, and inform sustainable decision-making under high uncertainty and adaptive management. Here, we identify the immediate scientific and societal needs, opportunities, and challenges for iterative near-term ecological forecasting. Over the past decade, data volume, variety, and accessibility have greatly increased, but challenges remain in interoperability, latency, and uncertainty quantification. Similarly, ecologists have made considerable advances in applying computational, informatic, and statistical methods, but opportunities exist for improving forecast-specific theory, methods, and cyberinfrastructure. Effective forecasting will also require changes in scientific training, culture, and institutions. The need to start forecasting is now; the time for making ecology more predictive is here, and learning by doing is the fastest route to drive the science forward.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of↗
USGS1999

Tadpoles: the Biology of Anuran Larvae

The recent alarming declines in amphibian populations worldwide and the suitability of amphibians for use in answering research questions in disciplines as diverse as molecular systematics, animal behavior, ecology, and evolutionary biology have focused enormous attention on tadpoles. Yet despite this growing interest, relatively little is known about these fascinating creatures. n this invaluable reference, leading experts on tadpole biology relate what we currently know about tadpoles and what we might learn from them in the future. Tadpoles provides detailed summaries of tadpole morphology, development, behavior, ecology, and environmental physiology; explores the evolutionary consequences of the tadpole stage; synthesizes available information on their biodiversity, and presents a standardized terminology and an exhaustive literature review of tadpole biology.

Book↗
USGS2020

A round-robin evaluation of the repeatability and reproducibility of environmental DNA assays for dreissenid mussels

Resource managers may be hesitant to make decisions based on environmental (e)DNA results alone since eDNA is an indirect method of species detection. One way to reduce the uncertainty of eDNA is to identify laboratory‐based protocols that ensure repeatable and reproducible results. We conducted a double‐blind round‐robin analysis of probe‐based assays for DNA of dreissenid ( Dreissena spp.) mussels, which are prolific aquatic invaders that can cause significant economic and ecological impacts. DNA extract from water samples spiked with known amounts of dreissenid DNA and from water samples collected from waters with and without dreissenids were analyzed by four independent research laboratories. We used results to calculate detection repeatability within laboratories and assays, detection reproducibility among laboratories and assays, and estimated dreissenid DNA copy number precision and accuracy. Laboratory and assay repeatability and reproducibility of detection results were high, 91% and 92%, respectively. The estimated copy numbers were neither precise nor accurate for samples spiked with <773 gene copies. These results suggest that eDNA surveillance of dreissenid mussels, using the protocols evaluated herein, can generate reliable detection data for decision‐making. However, managers should be cautious about using the quantitative information often associated with eDNA detections, especially when DNA is at lower abundance. Our results provide strong support that eDNA has the potential to provide repeatable and reproducible evidence under varying laboratory conditions and for different sample water chemistries. This is reassuring since the demand for eDNA surveillance is widespread and number of laboratories that process eDNA samples is growing steadily.

California, Montana, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Was↗
USGS2025

Bridging theory and practice to inform seed selection for restoration

Introduction Land managers often face the critical decision of what plant materials to select for ecological restoration. Selection depends on factors that span ecological conditions and human interventions in the restoration process, which can strongly influence the recovery of a degraded ecosystem. Objectives To improve the seed selection process, we compared scientific literature and guidance from five federal agencies to bridge seed selection “theory” and “practice” in the interior western and central United States. Methods We extracted recurring themes and keywords associated with abiotic, biotic, land management, and producer practices that influence seed selection and analyzed their proportional use between agency guidance and scientific literature. Results We identified significant overlap between key concepts in guidance and literature, highlighting the interconnectedness between science and management. However, nuanced patterns emerged across seed selection themes, including more focus in the literature on local adaptation and genetic structure, ramifications of introducing gene flow and artificial selection during plant production, and provenancing strategies to address changing climatic conditions. In contrast, agency guidance focused on genetically appropriate and environmentally suitable seed selection and practical concerns, including seed cost, availability, and diversity. Seed selection studies in the literature were concentrated in the Great Basin and Colorado Plateau, scattered in the Great Plains, and were largely experimental. Conclusions Our review suggests new opportunities for co-production of science and decision-making frameworks among researchers, land managers, and seed producers to inform seed selection guidance for restoration.

Restoration Ecology↗
USGS2026

Bayesian model selection to investigate meaningful spatial scales

Ecologists and other statistical practitioners with access to high-resolution spatial data often lack guidance on best approaches for discerning meaningful spatial scales for environmental covariates which is necessary when spatial factors influence environmental processes. Recently developed methods have attempted to automate investigating spatial scales for covariates by evaluating models for which potential explanatory variables are derived from circular extents of increasing size centered at survey locations. However, these methods make a strong assumption on the inclusion of the covariate and do not help discern whether a covariate should be included in the model. We present an approach that utilizes researcher guidance to create informative priors on the model space that, along with parallelizable Reversible Jump Markov chain Monte Carlo techniques, enables efficient estimation of posterior model probabilities to assist with the choice of meaningful spatial scales for environmental covariates.

Ecology and Evolution↗
USGS1989

Use of experimental ecosystems in regulatory decision making

Tiered testing for the effects of chemicals on aquatic ecosystems has begun to include tests at the ecosystem level as a component in pesticide regristration. Because such tests are expensive, regulators and industry need to know what additional information they can gain from such tests relative to the costs of the simpler single-species toxicity bioassays. Requirements for ecosystem-level testing have developed because resource managers have not fully understood the implications of potential damage to resources without having evaluations of the predicted impacts under field conditions. We review approaches taken in the use of experimental ecosystems, discuss benefits and limitations of small- and large-scale ecosystem tests, and point to correlative approaches between laboratory and field toxicity testing. Laboratory experimental ecosystems (microcosms) have been successfully used to measure contaminant bioavailability, to determine routes of uptake in moderately complex aquatic systems, and to isolate factors modifying contaminant uptake into the biota. Such factors cannot be as readily studied in outdoor experimental ecosystems because direct cause-and-effect relations are often confounded and difficult to isolate. However, laboratory tests can be designed to quantify the relations among three variables: known concentrations of Stressors; specific sublethal behavioral, biochemical, and physiological effects displayed by organisms; and responses that have been observed in ecosystem-level analyses. For regulatory purposes, the specificity of test results determines how widely they can be applied. Ecotoxicological research should be directed at attempts to identify instances where single-species testing would be the appropriate level of analysis for identifying critical ecological endpoints and for clarifying relationships between ecosystem structure and function, and where it would be inadequate for a given level of analysis.

Environmental Management↗
USGS2008

Landsat still contributing to environmental research

Landsat data have enabled continuous global monitoring of both human-caused and other land cover disturbances since 1972. Recently degraded performance and intermittent service of the Landsat 7 and Landsat 5 sensors, respectively, have raised concerns about the condition of global Earth observation programs. However, Landsat imagery is still useful for landscape change detection and this capability should continue into the foreseeable future.

Trends in Ecology and Evolution↗
USGS2011

USGS global change science strategy: A framework for understanding and responding to climate and land-use change

This U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Global Change Science Strategy expands on the Climate Variability and Change science component of the USGS 2007 Science Strategy, “Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges: USGS Science in the Coming Decade” (U.S. Geological Survey, 2007). Here we embrace the broad definition of global change provided in the U.S. Global Change Research Act of 1990 (Public Law 101–606,104 Stat. 3096–3104)—“Changes in the global environment (including alterations in climate, land productivity, oceans or other water resources, atmospheric chemistry, and ecological systems) that may alter the capacity of the Earth to sustain life”—with a focus on climate and land-use change. There are three major characteristics of this science strategy. First, it addresses the science required to broadly inform global change policy, while emphasizing the needs of natural-resource managers and reflecting the role of the USGS as the science provider for the Department of the Interior and other resource-management agencies. Second, the strategy identifies core competencies, noting 10 critical capabilities and strengths the USGS uses to overcome key problem areas. We highlight those areas in which the USGS is a science leader, recognizing the strong partnerships and effective collaboration that are essential to address complex global environmental challenges. Third, it uses a query-based approach listing key research questions that need to be addressed to create an agenda for hypothesis-driven global change science organized under six strategic goals. Overall, the strategy starts from where we are, provides a vision for where we want to go, and then describes high-priority strategic actions, including outcomes, products, and partnerships that can get us there. Global change science is a well-defined research field with strong linkages to the ecosystems, water, energy and minerals, natural hazards, and environmental health components of the USGS Science Strategy (2007). When science strategies that cover these other components are developed, coordinated implementation will be necessary to achieve Bureau-level synergies and optimize capabilities and expertise. In October 2010, USGS realigned its management and budget structure to implement its 2007 Science Strategy. The new organizational structure, in which “Global Change” is one of seven key mission areas, lends itself to the advancement of the established six strategic goals. USGS global change science is formally represented by the “Climate and Land-Use Change” Mission Area in the FY 2012 budget (USGS, 2011). This plan was developed by the USGS Global Change Science Strategy Planning Team (SSPT) appointed by the USGS Director on March 4, 2010 and charged with developing a Global Change Science Strategy for the coming decade (McNutt, 2010). USGS managers and science staff are the main audience for this science strategy. This document is also intended to serve as the foundation for consistent USGS collaboration and communication with partners and stakeholders.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2015

FORUM: Effective management of ecological resilience – are we there yet?

Ecological resilience is developing into a credible paradigm for policy development and environmental management for preserving natural capital in a rapidly changing world. However, resilience emerges from complex interactions, limiting the translation of theory into practice. Main limitations include the following: (i) difficulty in quantification and detection of changes in ecological resilience, (ii) a lack of empirical evidence to support preventative or proactive management and (iii) difficulties in managing processes operating across socio-ecological systems that vary in space and time. We highlight recent research with the potential to address these limitations including new and/or improved indicators of resilience and tools to assess scale as a driver of resilience. Synthesis and applications . Effective resilience-based management must be adaptive in nature. To support this, we propose an operational model using resilience-based iterative management actions operating across scales.

Journal of Applied Ecology↗
USGS2011

Dose-Response Calculator for ArcGIS

The Dose-Response Calculator for ArcGIS is a tool that extends the Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) ArcGIS 10 Desktop application to aid with the visualization of relationships between two raster GIS datasets. A dose-response curve is a line graph commonly used in medical research to examine the effects of different dosage rates of a drug or chemical (for example, carcinogen) on an outcome of interest (for example, cell mutations) (Russell and others, 1982). Dose-response curves have recently been used in ecological studies to examine the influence of an explanatory dose variable (for example, percentage of habitat cover, distance to disturbance) on a predicted response (for example, survival, probability of occurrence, abundance) (Aldridge and others, 2008). These dose curves have been created by calculating the predicted response value from a statistical model at different levels of the explanatory dose variable while holding values of other explanatory variables constant. Curves (plots) developed using the Dose-Response Calculator overcome the need to hold variables constant by using values extracted from the predicted response surface of a spatially explicit statistical model fit in a GIS, which include the variation of all explanatory variables, to visualize the univariate response to the dose variable. Application of the Dose-Response Calculator can be extended beyond the assessment of statistical model predictions and may be used to visualize the relationship between any two raster GIS datasets (see example in tool instructions). This tool generates tabular data for use in further exploration of dose-response relationships and a graph of the dose-response curve.

Data Series↗
USGS2026

A multi-state assessment of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), pesticides, and antibiotic resistance genes in white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) of the United States

Sentinel species provide a vital One Health perspective on ecosystem contamination driven by rising global chemical production. We evaluated white-tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ; n = 54, 24 states, six matrices) as nationwide bioindicators for PFAS, pesticides, antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genes, and microbiome diversity. PFAS were detected in 100% of deer samples (26 compounds identified overall; non-detect to 12.3 ng/g ww), with preferential accumulation in the liver, indicating widespread systemic exposure. Neither region, landscape, nor source proximity predicted liver PFAS concentrations, whereas landscape had a significant, albeit weak, effect on spleen concentrations. This overall absence of strong spatial drivers suggests ubiquitous background contamination rather than localized point-source exposure. Conversely, 13 pesticides/transformation products (ranging from non-detect to 88.6 ng/g ww; highest in scat) were detected in only 28% of samples, despite widespread national use. Since not all possible transformation products were measured, these data reflect the accumulation of the target compound rather than total pesticide exposure. Driven by the rapid metabolism and excretion of herbicides, persistent insecticides dominated tissue samples. Additionally, biological threats were prevalent with eight distinct AMR genes identified in WTD scat, frequently featuring the florfenicol resistance gene (flo st, 33%). The presence of synthetic compounds and AMRs in game meat and scat pose a direct One Health risk to the human food chain. These findings highlight the value of using a single, widely distributed sentinel species as an early warning system for the ecological and public health threats posed by global chemical pollution.

contiguous United States↗
USGS1998

Choosing indicators of natural resource condition: A case study in Arches National Park, Utah, USA

Heavy visitor use in many areas of the world have necessitated development of ways to assess visitation impacts. Arches National Park recently completed a Visitor Experience and Resource Protection (VERP) plan. Integral to this plan was developing a method to identify biological indicators that would both measure visitor impacts and response to management actions. The process used in Arches for indicator selection is outlined here as a model applicable to many areas facing similar challenges. The steps were: (1) Vegetation types most used by visitors were identified. Impacted and unimpacted areas in these types were sampled, comparing vegetation and soil factors. (2) Variables found to differ significantly between compared sites were used as potential indicators. (3) Site-specific criteria for indicators were developed, and potential indicators evaluated using these criteria. (4) Chosen indicators were further researched for ecological relevancy. (5) Final indicators were chosen, field tested, and monitoring sites designated. In Arches, indicators were chosen for monitoring annually (soil crust index, soil compaction, number of used social trails and soil aggregate stability) and every five years (vegetation cover and frequency; ground cover; soil chemistry; and plant tissue chemistry).

Environmental Management↗
USGS2012

The Midwest Stream Quality Assessment

In 2013, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Water-Quality Assessment Program (NAWQA) and USGS Columbia Environmental Research Center (CERC) will be collaborating with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Rivers and Streams Assessment (NRSA) to assess stream quality across the Midwestern United States. The sites selected for this study are a subset of the larger NRSA, implemented by the EPA, States and Tribes to sample flowing waters across the United States ( http://water.epa.gov/type/rsl/monitoring/riverssurvey/index.cfm ). The goals are to characterize water-quality stressors—contaminants, nutrients, and sediment—and ecological conditions in streams throughout the Midwest and to determine the relative effects of these stressors on aquatic organisms in the streams. Findings will contribute useful information for communities and policymakers by identifying which human and environmental factors are the most critical in controlling stream quality. This collaborative study enhances information provided to the public and policymakers and minimizes costs by leveraging and sharing data gathered under existing programs. In the spring and early summer, NAWQA will sample streams weekly for contaminants, nutrients, and sediment. During the same time period, CERC will test sediment and water samples for toxicity, deploy time-integrating samplers, and measure reproductive effects and biomarkers of contaminant exposure in fish or amphibians. NRSA will sample sites once during the summer to assess ecological and habitat conditions in the streams by collecting data on algal, macroinvertebrate, and fish communities and collecting detailed physical-habitat measurements. Study-team members from all three programs will work in collaboration with USGS Water Science Centers and State agencies on study design, execution of sampling and analysis, and reporting.

Midwest↗
USGS2008

The Colorado Plateau III: integrating research and resources management for effective conservation

Roughly centered on the Four Corners region of the southwestern United States, the Colorado Plateau covers an area of 130,000 square miles. The relatively high semi-arid province boasts nine national parks, sixteen national monuments, many state parks, and dozens of wilderness areas. With the highest concentration of parklands in North America and unique geological and ecological features, the area is of particular interest to researchers. Derived from the Eighth Biennial Conference of Research on the Colorado Plateau, this third volume in a series of research on the Colorado Plateau expands upon the previous two books. This volume focuses on the integration of science into resource management issues, summarizes what criteria make a successful collaborative effort, outlines land management concerns about drought, provides summaries of current biological, sociological, and archaeological research, and highlights current environmental issues in the Four Corner States of Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, and Utah. With broad coverage that touches on topics as diverse as historical aspects of pronghorn antelope movement patterns through calculating watershed prescriptions to the role of wind-blown sand in preserving archaeological sites on the Colorado River, this volume stands as a compendium of cuttingedge management-oriented research on the Colorado Plateau. The book also introduces, for the first time, tools that can be used to assist with collaboration efforts among landowners and managers who wish to work together toward preserving resources on the Colorado Plateau and offers a wealth of insights into land management questions for many readers, especially people interested in the natural history, biology, anthropology, wildlife, and cultural management issues of the region.

Utah;Arizona;Colorado;New Mexico↗
USGS2017

Five-year external reviews of the eight Department of Interior Climate Science Centers: Southeast Climate Science Center

In 2008, the U.S. Congress authorized the establishment of the National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center (NCCWSC) within the U.S. Department of Interior (DOI). Housed administratively within the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), NCCWSC is part of the DOI’s ongoing mission to meet the challenges of climate change and its effects on wildlife and aquatic resources. From 2010 through 2012, NCCWSC established eight regional DOI Climate Science Centers (CSCs). Each of these regional CSCs operated with the mission to “synthesize and integrate climate change impact data and develop tools that the Department’s managers and partners can use when managing the Department’s land, water, fish and wildlife, and cultural heritage resources” (Salazar 2009). The model developed by NCCWSC for the regional CSCs employed a dual approach of a federal USGS-staffed component and a parallel host-university component established competitively through a 5-year cooperative agreement with NCCWSC. At the conclusion of this 5-year agreement, a review of each CSC was undertaken, with the Southeast Climate Science Center (SE CSC) review in February 2016. The SE CSC is hosted by North Carolina State University (NCSU) in Raleigh, North Carolina, and is physically housed within the NCSU Department of Applied Ecology along with the Center for Applied Aquatic Ecology, the North Carolina Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit (CFWRU), and the North Carolina Agromedicine Institute. The U.S. Department of Agriculture Southeast Regional Climate Hub is based at NCSU as is the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Southeast Regional Climate Center, the North Carolina Institute for Climate Studies, the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, the NOAA National Weather Service, the State Climate Office of North Carolina, and the U.S. Forest Service Eastern Forest Environmental Threat Assessment Center. This creates a strong core of organizations operating in close proximity focused on climate issues. The geographic area covered by the SE CSC represents all or part of 16 states and the Caribbean Islands and has overlapping boundaries with seven Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs): Appalachian LCC, Eastern Tallgrass Prairie and Big Rivers LCC, Gulf Coast Prairie LCC, Gulf Coastal Plains and Ozarks LCC, Peninsular Florida LCC, South Atlantic LCC, and Caribbean LCC. The SE CSC region also encompasses 134 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service refuges and 89 National Park Service (NPS) units and is home to 11 federally recognized and 54 state recognized tribes.

Report↗
USGS2020

Drones provide a better method to find nests and estimate nest survival for colonial waterbirds: A demonstration with Western Grebes

Drone use in wildlife biology has greatly increased as they become cheaper and easier to deploy in the field. In this paper we describe a less invasive method of using drones and exploring their limitations for studying colonial nesting waterbirds. Western Grebes, like most colonial nesting waterbirds, can be very sensitive to human interaction. Using a 3DR Solo quad copter equipped with a high-resolution digital camera we were able to effectively map and monitor a Western Grebe breeding colony throughout the nesting period with a series of 6 flights. We were able to use drone collected aerial imagery to model nest survival while minimizing disturbance to the birds. However, we were not able to deploy the drone at all of our study sites. Our ability to effectively deploy the drone was hindered by the environmental and vegetation characteristics of a site. Drone technology can be a useful tool, especially when studying a species sensitive to human interaction. However, there researchers should carefully consider their species and study site to evaluate if a drone is the proper tool to meet their objectives.

Idaho↗
USGS2026

Restoring dryland water cycles for precipitation feedback and climate stability; a review

Drylands across the globe are experiencing intensifying water scarcity, land degradation, and hydroclimatic extremes. This review integrates evidence from multidecadal field studies, hydrologic monitoring, geomorphic and ecological assessments, remote sensing, and land–atmosphere science to evaluate how restoration influences key components of the terrestrial water cycle. Low-tech natural infrastructure in dryland streams (NIDS)—including check dams, leaky weirs, one-rock dams, and gabions—has emerged as a promising but under-synthesized nature-based solution for restoring hydrologic function in these environments. We describe the mechanisms through which these interventions modify runoff detention, infiltration, sediment and alluvial storage, shallow-groundwater recharge, vegetation recovery, and surface-energy partitioning, and we summarize outcomes across diverse dryland settings. Findings consistently show increased water residence time, enhanced soil-moisture storage, expanded riparian vegetation, extended flow duration, and shifts toward greater latent-heat flux—producing localized cooling and strengthened ecohydrological feedbacks. Building on these localized effects, we articulate a hypothesis that links the spatial extent of restoration, the density of NIDS per unit drainage area, and the magnitude of the latent-to-sensible-heat contrast generated by wetter post-rainfall conditions. Specifically, we hypothesize that when NIDS are implemented at densities permitted by topography and across areas large enough to maintain elevated soil moisture after storm events, the resulting increases in latent heat flux, surface cooling, and boundary-layer moistening may enhance moisture convergence and boundary-layer development, potentially increasing the likelihood or stability of convective precipitation, analogous to how reductions in these processes have contributed to regional drought intensification. These land–atmosphere feedbacks remain untested at scale but represent an important research Frontier. By integrating hydrologic, geomorphic, ecological, and atmospheric perspectives, this review provides a comprehensive framework for considering how low-tech, landscape-scale interventions can strengthen watershed resilience and contribute to climate-relevant nature-based solutions.

Arizona↗