Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Review Report”

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
USGS2018

Yellowstone grizzly bear investigations — Annual report of the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team 2017

This Annual Report summarizes results of grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos ) monitoring and research conducted in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) by the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team (IGBST) during 2017. This report also contains a summary of grizzly bear management actions to address conflict situations. Annual reports of the IGBST summarize annual data collection. Because additional information may be obtained after publication, data summaries are subject to change. Data, analyses, and summaries presented in this report supersede previously published data and analyses and interpretations may be subject to change contingent on future manuscript publication and the peer review process. The research described in this report complied with current laws of the United States of America, was conducted in accordance with animal care and use guidelines, and was approved by Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees of the respective member agencies.

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming↗
USGS2013

Exploration Review

This summary of international mineral exploration activities for 2012 draws upon information from industry sources, published literature and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) specialists. The summary provides data on exploration budgets by region and mineral commodity, identifies significant mineral discoveries and areas of mineral exploration, discusses government programs affecting the mineral exploration industry and presents analyses of exploration activities performed by the mineral industry. Three sources of information are reported and analyzed in this annual review of international exploration for 2012: 1) budgetary statistics expressed in U.S. nominal dollars provided by SNL Metals Economics Group (MEG) of Halifax, Nova Scotia; 2) regional and site-specific exploration activities that took place in 2012 as compiled by the USGS and 3) regional events including economic, social and political conditions that affected exploration activities, which were derived from published sources and unpublished discussions with USGS and industry specialists.

Mining Engineering↗
USGS2019

Guidelines and standard procedures for high-frequency groundwater-quality monitoring stations—Design, operation, and record computation

High-frequency water-quality monitoring stations measure and transmit data, often in near real-time, from a wide range of aquatic environments to assess the quality of the Nation’s water resources. Common instrumentation for high-frequency water-quality data collection uses a multi-parameter sonde, which typically has sensors that measure and record water temperature, specific conductance, pH, and dissolved oxygen. Nitrate, turbidity, and fluorescent dissolved organic matter can also be monitored at high frequency. High-frequency groundwater-quality monitoring stations provide high-resolution time-series data to improve understanding of the timing of water-quality changes in the subsurface, especially for aquifer systems with short groundwater-residence times. High-frequency time-series data are used to monitor surface-water to groundwater interaction, quantify contaminant transport rates, and study water-quality variability in relation to variability of precipitation and groundwater pumping rates. High-frequency monitoring for contaminants or their surrogates have the added benefit of providing an early warning to protect valuable or sensitive aquifer resources. High-frequency time-series data also reveal short-term trends in groundwater quality, which may not be identifiable from monthly or annual sampling programs which facilitate the interpretation of decadal conditions. Systematic application of water-quality sonde operational procedures and a standard record-computation process are part of the required quality assurance for producing and documenting complete and accurate high-frequency groundwater-quality monitoring records. To collect quality high-frequency groundwater times-series data, water-quality sondes and sensors require careful field operation, cleaning, and calibration, as well as specific procedures for data computation, evaluation, review, and publication of final records. This report provides guidelines for the use of water-quality sondes and sensors for high-frequency groundwater-quality monitoring and updates the guidance pertaining to standardized records computation procedures for a wide range of groundwater environments. This report builds on previous continuous surface-water-quality monitoring guidance documentation for water temperature, specific conductance, pH, dissolved oxygen, and nitrate. The specific groundwater-quality monitoring guidelines presented in this report address station selection, design, installation, and operations; sonde and sensor inspections and cleaning and calibration methods; troubleshooting procedures; data evaluations, data corrections, and record computations; and record review, approval, and auditing procedures for the groundwater environment.

Techniques and Methods↗
USGS2009

Animal species endangerment: The role of environmental pollution

Multiple factors contribute to the decline of species. Habitat destruction is the primary factor that threatens species. affecting 73 % of endangered species. The second major factor causing species decline is the introduction of nonnative species. affecting 68% of endangered species. Pollution and overharvesting were identified as impacting, respectively, 38 and 15% of endangered species. Other factors affecting species decline include hybridization, competition, disease, and other interspecific interactions. Once a species is reduced to a remnant of its former population size and distribution, its vulnerability to catastrophic pollution events increases, frequently exceeding or replacing the factors responsible for the initial decline. Small, isolated populations are particularly vulnerable to catastrophic loss by an acute event. such as a chemical spill or pesticide application. However, when it comes to surviving a single disaster, widespread subpopulations of a species are far more resilient and ensure genetic survival. Hypothesizing theoretical concerns of potential factors that could affect an endangered species could predispose the scientific and political communities to jeopardizing threats. The user of recovery plans as a data source must be aware of the bias within the data set. These data should be used with the caveat that the source of information in recovery plans is not always based on scientific research and rigorous data collection. Over 58% of the information identifying species threats is based on estimates or personal communication. while only 42% is based on peer reviewed literature, academic research. or government reports. Many recovery plans were written when a species was initially listed in the 1970s or 1980s. Politics, human disturbance, and habitat demand issues evolve over a 20- to 30-year period. leaving much of the threats facing endangered species outdated and inadequate. These data are most valuable when used to facilitate reviews of Section 7 consultations and environmental impact statements, review permit applications, conduct environmental risk assessments, prioritize research needs. and identify limiting factors affecting species health. These data are also useful in identifying potential threats to species' health. Without properly identifying threats to endangered species based on sound. scientific research. there is little hope to successfully recover an endangered species.

Book chapter↗
USGS2015

Biodiversity and Habitat Markets—Policy, Economic, and Ecological implications of Market-Based Conservation

This report is a primer on market-like and market-based mechanisms designed to conserve biodiversity and habitat. The types of markets and market-based approaches that were implemented or are emerging to benefit biodiversity and habitat in the United States are examined. The central approaches considered in this report include payments for ecosystem services, conservation banks, habitat exchanges, and eco-labels. Based on literature reviews and input from experts and practitioners, the report characterizes each market-based approach including policy context and structure; the theoretical basis for applying market-based approaches; the ecological effectiveness of practices and tools for measuring performance; and the future outlook for biodiversity and habitat markets. This report draws from previous research and serves as a summary of pertinent information associated with biodiversity and habitat markets while providing references to materials that go into greater detail on specific topics.

Circular↗
USGS2024

Annotated bibliography of scientific research relevant to oil and gas reclamation best management practices in the western United States, published from 1969 through 2020

Integrating recent scientific knowledge into management decisions supports effective natural resource management and can lead to better resource outcomes. However, finding and accessing scientific knowledge can be time consuming and costly. To assist in this process, the U.S. Geological Survey has created a series of annotated bibliographies on topics of management concern for lands in the western United States (U.S.). Oil and gas development on public lands is a long-standing and substantial component of local and regional economies and has expanded in recent decades, particularly on public lands in the western U.S. This development is associated with extensive networks of pipelines, roads, and processing facilities, across which reclamation is Federally mandated following initial well pad development (“interim” reclamation) and once resource extraction is complete (“final” reclamation). Reclamation is critical for recovering ecological services to energy-affected lands, including vegetation productivity, wildlife habitat, water and air quality, and soil stability (for example, resistance to wind and water erosion). However, reclamation of oil and gas affected lands in the western U.S. has proved challenging due to an array of regulatory and environmental factors, such as minimally developed soils, short growing seasons, herbivory, high winds, invasive species, rugged terrain, and in particular, arid climates associated with low total precipitation, high evapotranspiration rates, and highly variable precipitation patterns. We compiled and summarized journal articles, government reports, technical reports, proceedings, and theses and dissertations relevant to oil and gas reclamation. We constrained our search to products published on or before December 31, 2020 but did not limit our search by a starting date; the earliest product resulting from this effort was published in March 1969. Second, we manually scanned the last 15 years (2005-2020) of tables of contents in journals, bibliographies, and proceedings of which we were aware would contain articles highly relevant to this bibliography. We carried out the search for these products through multiple means: (1) performing a structured search of two reference databases, (2) examining articles published since 2005 in highly relevant scientific journals and conference proceedings, and (3) reviewing additional material suggested by authors of products identified in steps 1 and 2. Our search was intentionally broad in order to identify as much relevant work as possible, much of which is professionally applied and tested within the industry of oil and gas reclamation, but which remains unpublished in scientific journals. We refined the initial list of products by removing: (1) duplicates, (2) products not written in English, (3) products that were not relevant to the arid ecosystems of western North America, (4) products that were not released as research, data products, or review articles in journals or as formal scientific reports, and (5) products with data which were not relevant to reclamation of oil and gas-affected lands, or for which the study did not present new data, findings, or syntheses relevant to reclamation of oil and gas-affected lands. We summarized each product using a consistent structure (background, objectives, methods, location, findings, and implications) and assigned standardized management topics to each. Management topics are intended to aid online searching within the bibliography and are described in more detail in the Methods Section of this report; they include what type of disturbance the product addresses (well pads, mining, pipelines), what aspect of oil and gas reclamation they pertain to (practices, standards, monitoring), what type of data are present in the product (for instance soil or vegetation recovery data), and an indication if the product were from a source other than a published, peer-reviewed outlet (such as dissertations or unpublished professional reports – these are identified as grey literature). The review process for this annotated bibliography included an initial internal colleague review of each summary, requesting input on each summary from an author of the original product, and a formal peer-review. Our initial searches resulted in 3,197 total products, of which 290 met our criteria for inclusion. “Reclamation Practices” is by far the management topic most addressed, followed by “Reclamation Monitoring,” for example, products assessing what and how monitoring methods are used to track and measure reclamation outcome. This document may be accessed at https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20231068 or from the U.S. Geological Survey Publication Warehouse ( https://pubs.usgs.gov/ ). The 1-page product summaries herein will also be used to create a bibliography at https://apps.usgs.gov/science-for-resource-managers that includes links to each original product, where available, and in which subject matter will be searchable by topic, location, and year. The studies compiled and summarized here may inform planning and management actions that seek to reclaim landscapes across the western U.S. which have been affected by oil and gas development.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2020

Communicating hazards—A social science review to meet U.S. Geological Survey needs

This report is for U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)—and any other—hazard scientists who want to improve the understanding and use of their scientific information, particularly by non-experts. In order for people to use science, they need to understand it. The highly technical, specialized nature of scientific information makes that difficult, particularly when few scientists are trained to communicate with people outside their fields. These issues are of special importance to the USGS because it has many users who are not scientists and because it develops and applies hazard science to help protect the safety, security, and economic well-being of our Nation. In 2010, the Science Application for Risk Reduction group at the USGS discovered the Center for Research on Environmental Decisions (CRED) guide, “The Psychology of Climate Change Communication.” Ever since, a growing number of USGS staff who need to communicate about hazards have used that guide and have asked CRED for a companion report dedicated to hazard communication to harness knowledge from more than 50 years of social science research. In 2016, the USGS and CRED launched a collaboration to develop that companion report. Ultimately, a CRED hazard communication guide would be a Columbia University publication with a wide focus and would include many hazards that are outside the USGS purview. This report is a first step and concentrates strictly on hazard communication needs at the USGS. To identify those needs and tailor this effort to USGS hazard communication priorities, this collaboration began with telephone interviews and an online survey of USGS staff. This report is the result; it summarizes social science research and experience in the areas of hazard communication that USGS participants deemed most important to include.

Circular↗
USGS2014

Status and trends of Caribbean coral reefs: 1970-2012

This it the 9th status report since the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) was founded in 1995 was the data arm of the International Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI) to document the ecological condition or corral reefs, strengthen monitoring efforts, and link existing organizations and people working on reefs worldwide. The US Government provided the initial funding to help set up a global network of coral reef workers and has continued to provide core support. Since then, the series of reports have aimed to present the current status of coral reefs of the world or particular regions, the major threats to reefs and their consequences, and any initiative undertaken under the auspices of ICRI or other bodies to arrest or reverse the decline of coral reefs. IUCN assumed responsibility for hosting the global coordination of the GCRMN in 2010 under the scientific direction of Jeremy Jackson with the following objectives: 1. Document quantitatively the global status and trends for corals, macroalgae, sea urchins, and fishes based on available data from individual scientists as well as the peer reviewed scientific literature, monitoring programs, and report. 2. Bring together regional experts in a series of workshops to involve them in data compilation, analysis, and synthesis. 3. Integrate coral reef status and trends with independent environmental, management, and socioeconomic data to better understand the primary factors responsible for coral reef decline, the possible synergies among factors that may further magnify their impacts, and how these stresses may be more effectively alleviated. Work with GCRMN partners to establish simple and practical standardized protocols for future monitoring and assessment. Disseminate information and results to help guide member state policy and actions. The overarching objective is to understand why some reefs are much healthier than others, to identify what kinds of actions have been particularly beneficial or harmful, and to vigorously communicate results in simple and straightforward terms to foster more effective conservation and management. This and subsequent reports will focus on separate biogeographic regions in a stepwise fashion and combine all of the results for a global synthesis in the coming years. We began in the wide Caribbean region because the historical data are so extensive and to refine methods of analysis before moving on to other regions. This report documents quantitative trends for Caribbean reef corals, macroalgae, sea urchins, and fishes based on data from 90 reef locations over the past 43 tears. This is the first report to combine all these disparate kinds of data in a single place to explore how the different major components of coral reef ecosystems interact on a broadly regional oceanic scale. We obtained data from more than 35,000 ecological surveys carried out by 78 principal investigators (PIs) and some 200 colleagues working in 34 countries, states, and territories throughout the wide Caribbean region. We conducted two workshops in Panama and Brisbane, Australia to bring together people who provided the data to assist in data quality control, analysis, and synthesis. The first workshop at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (STRI) in the Republic of Panama 29 April to 5 May, 2012 included scientists from 18 countries and territories to verify and expand the database and to conduct exploratory analyses of status and trends. Preliminary results based on the Panama workshop were presented to the DC Marine Community and Smithsonian Institution Senate of Scientists in May 2012 and at the International Coral Reef Symposium (ICRS) and annual ICRI meeting in Cairns, Australia in July 2012. The second workshop in Brisbane, Australia in December 2012 brought together eight coral reef scientists for more detailed data analysis and organization of results for this report and subsequent publications. Subsequent presentations to solicit comments while the report was being finalized were made in 2013-2014 at the ICRI General meeting in Belize, the biennial meeting of the Association of Island Marine Laboratories in Jamaica, the Panamerican Coral Reef Congress in Merida, Mexico, the annual meeting of he Western Society of Naturalists, and numerous universities in Costa Rica, the USA and Europe. The main body of the report is in two sections. Part I provides an overview of overall status and trends and detailed analyses of the multiple factors responsible for the decline of reef corals throughout the entire wider Caribbean region. The editors are grateful to all the people who have so generously provided data and expertise, but we assume responsibility for the many statements, conclusions and recommendations and final wording of the text. Part II provides a more detailed analysis of the status and trends of coral reef ecosystems in the 32 countries, states, and territories for which we have data. The format includes maps indicating all locations sampled, a detailed table of data sources and sites surveyed, timelines of ecologically important evens, and relevant references. Each of these reports was compiled in consultation with local experts and all those who provided data and advice are listed as authors of each country report.

Report↗
USGS2015

Oil-particle interactions and submergence from crude oil spills in marine and freshwater environments: review of the science and future research needs

Oil-particle interactions and oil submergence are of much interest to oil spill responders and scientists, especially as transportation of light and heavy crude oils increases in North America’s coastal marine and freshwater environments. This report contains an up-to-date review of the state of the science for oil-particle aggregates (OPAs), in terms of their formation and stability which may alter the transport, fate, and toxicity of the residual oil and, hence, its level of ecological risk. Operational considerations—detection, containment, and recovery—are discussed. Although much is known about oil-particle interactions in coastal marine environments, there remains a need for additional science on methods to detect and quantify the presence of OPAs and to understand their effects on containment and recovery of oil spilled under various temperature regimes and in different aquatic habitats including freshwater environments.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2008

Sources and implications of lead ammunition and fishing tackle on natural resources

A technical review of lead sources that originate from hunting, shooting sports, and fishing activities was undertaken by the American Fisheries Society and The Wildlife Society. The report addresses (1) sources of lead that originate from hunting, shooting sports, and fishing activities, (2) the hazard and risk that lead from these activities pose to natural resources, and (3) the management implications for fish and wildlife professionals and policy makers.

Wildlife Society Technical Review↗
USGS2018

Revised groundwater-flow model of the glacial aquifer system north of Aberdeen, South Dakota, through water year 2015

The city of Aberdeen, in northeastern South Dakota, requires an expanded and sustainable supply of water to meet current and future demands. Conceptual and numerical models of the glacial aquifer system in the area north of Aberdeen were developed by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the City of Aberdeen in 2012. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the City of Aberdeen, completed a study to revise the original numerical groundwater-flow model using data through water year (WY) 2015 to aid the City of Aberdeen in their development of plans and strategies for a sustainable water supply and to increase understanding of the glacial aquifer system and groundwater-flow system near Aberdeen. The original model was revised to improve the fit between model-simulated values and observed (measured or estimated) data, provide greater insight into surface-water interactions, and improve the usefulness of the model for water-supply planning. The revised groundwater-flow model (hereafter referred to as the “revised model”) presented in this report supersedes the original model. The purpose of this report is to describe a revised groundwater-flow model including data collection, model calibration, and model results for the glacial aquifer system including the Elm, Middle James, and Deep James aquifers north of Aberdeen, South Dakota, using updated hydrologic data through WY 2015. The original numerical model was revised in several ways. The model was modified by adding four new layers, which included a surficial layer, two intervening confining layers, and a shale bedrock layer. The revised model provides an improved understanding of the groundwater-flow system in comparison to the original model. The principal aquifers of the model area include portions of the Elm, Middle James, and Deep James aquifers. The lithologic information used to define and describe the aquifers in the model area was unaltered; however, aquifer properties and boundary conditions were reviewed and updated using geological information reported by the South Dakota Department of Environmental and Natural Resources and information obtained from geophysical investigations for this study. The horizontal extent of the Elm, Middle James, and Deep James aquifers was unaltered from the original model. The thickness of the Deep James aquifer was modified based on interpretations from the geophysical investigations. In general, groundwater in the Elm aquifer flowed from northwest to southeast and locally towards rivers and streams. Similarly, in the Middle James and Deep James aquifers, groundwater also typically flowed southeast. The revisions made to the original model include use of the following MODFLOW stress packages: Recharge, Evapotranspiration, Time-Variant Specified Head, Wells, Drains, and Stream Flow Routing, all of which were updated from the original model except for the Stream Flow Routing Package, which replaced the River Package used in the original model. Model calibration is the process of estimating model parameters to minimize the differences, or residuals, between observed data and simulated values; therefore, Parameter ESTimation (PEST) software was used to optimize model input parameters by matching model-simulated values to observed data. Calibration parameters included horizontal hydraulic conductivity, vertical hydraulic conductivity, specific yield, specific storage, and vertical streambed conductance for stream and drain cells. Multipliers were used to calibrate the recharge and evapotranspiration stresses. Evapotranspiration extinction depth also was adjusted during model calibration. Comparisons to the original model are described to highlight the changes made in the revised model. In general, the revised model adequately simulates the natural system and compares favorably with observed hydrologic data. Simulated water levels were evaluated by comparing them to single water-level observations at selected well locations. The selected wells were the same wells used in the original model. The coefficient of determination value between simulated and observed water levels for the revised model was 0.89 and included simulated and observed values from October 1, 1974 (WY 1975), through September 30, 2015 (WY 2015). The coefficient of determination value for the original model was 0.94 and included simulated and observed values from October 1, 1974, through September 30, 2009. The difference may indicate that the original model could have been overfit to hydraulic head observations because base flow was not simulated. The additional data used in the revised model included some climatically wetter, more extreme periods, such as 2011, in which annual precipitation was 30.9 inches. Average annual precipitation for the original model timeframe, which included data from WYs 1975–2009, was 20.26 inches. Additional precipitation data for WYs 2010–15, included in the revised model timeframe, resulted in an average annual precipitation for WYs 1975–2015 in the model area of 20.6 inches. The larger variability in climate data coupled with the additional water-level data could explain the lower coefficient of determination for water levels in the revised model. The revised model was used to calculate various groundwater-budget components for steady-state and transient conditions for WYs 1975–2015. The time-variant specified-head cells in the revised model had the largest change when compared to the original steady-state model for inflows and outflows. Comparing the transient budget components between the original and the revised models indicated that inflow from recharge and time-variant specified-head cells had the greatest effect on groundwater inflows, and outflow from storage had the greatest effect on groundwater outflows. The simulated potentiometric contours from the revised model were compared with (1) the observed (interpreted) potentiometric surface (layer 2) and the hydraulic head values (layers 4 and 6) and (2) the simulated contours from the original model. The simulated hydraulic gradients and general direction of groundwater flow in the Elm aquifer in the revised model generally matched the observed potentiometric contours, the simulated potentiometric contours from the original model, and general flow directions interpreted to be perpendicular to the contours. Minor discrepancies between simulated potentiometric contours from the revised model and the observed potentiometric contours may be due to the lack of observed data in the model area. The revised model was designed to reduce the limitations of the original model. The revisions were validated by comparing the results of the original model with the revised model. A primary benefit of the revised model is the inclusion of the surficial deposits and the confining units as explicit layers in the model. The addition of the surficial layer was beneficial for three primary reasons: (1) more accurate representation of recharge from precipitation, (2) more accurate representation of groundwater evapotranspiration, and (3) more accurate representation of groundwater and surface-water interactions. The groundwater model is a numeric approximation of a complex physical hydrologic system, and the revised model data were interpolated in regions with sparse data. Additionally, model discretization included averaged and interpolated values for water use, withdrawal rates, and hydraulic conductivity. The revised model provides a useful estimate for hydraulic gradients, groundwater-flow directions, and aquifer response to groundwater withdrawals.

South Dakota↗
USGS2017

U.S. Geological Survey Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units Program—2016–2017 Research Abstracts

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has several strategic goals that focus its efforts on serving the American people. The USGS Ecosystems Mission Area has responsibility for the following objectives under the strategic goal of “Science to Manage and Sustain Resources for Thriving Economies and Healthy Ecosystems”: Understand, model, and predict change in natural systems Conserve and protect wildlife and fish species and their habitats Reduce or eliminate the threat of invasive species and wildlife disease This report provides abstracts of the majority of ongoing research investigations of the USGS Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units program and is intended to complement the 2016 Cooperative Research Units Program Year in Review Circular 1424 ( https://doi.org/10.3133/cir1424 ). The report is organized by the following major science themes that contribute to the objectives of the USGS: Advanced Technologies Climate Science Decision Science Ecological Flows Ecosystem Services Endangered Species Conservation, Recovery, and Proactive Strategies Energy Human Dimensions Invasive Species Landscape Ecology Species of Greatest Conservation Need Species Population, Habitat, and Harvest Management Wildlife Health and Disease

Circular↗
USGS1982

U.S. Geological Survey activities, fiscal year 1981

This U.S. Geological Survey Activities report for fiscal year 1981 presents a summary of the work performed between October 1, 1980 and September 30, 1981. The main sections of this report are: (1) The Year in Review; a brief overview of the significant events of the Geological Survey during fiscal year 1980; (2) Perspectives; essays focusing on specific events (rather than scientific topics) and programs involving multi-Division participation; (3) Missions, Organization, and Budget; a description of the Geological Survey 's major duties and assignments and of the organizational structure that supports its missions; and (4) Division Chapters; a description of the significant accomplishments (rather than a comprehensive program by program discussion) of each of the eight operating Divisions and Offices. Also included are supplementary information regarding key personnel, cooperators, and selected summary budgetary tables. (USGS)

Circular↗
USGS1999

Abstracts of the 11th Annual U.S. Geological Survey, Central Region, 1999 Poster Review; Collected Abstracts of Selected Poster Papers Presented at Scientific Meetings

In 1999, the U.S. Geological Survey Central Region had a poster review where USGS scientists showcased posters that had been presented at scientific meetings. This report contains abstracts for selected posters that were presented at this review. Science topics were from several USGS teams with a broad range of topics.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2015

Revision and proposed modification for a total maximum daily load model for Upper Klamath Lake, Oregon

This report presents Phase 2 of the review and development of the mass balance water-quality model, originally developed in 2001, that guided establishment of the phosphorus (P) total maximum daily load (TMDL) for Upper Klamath and Agency Lakes, Oregon. The purpose of Phase 2 was to incorporate a longer (19-year) set of external phosphorus loading data into the lake TMDL model than had originally been available, and to develop a proof-of-concept method for modeling algal mortality and the consequent decrease in chlorophyll a that had not been possible with the 2001 TMDL model formulation. Using the extended 1991–2010 external phosphorus loading dataset, the lake TMDL model was recalibrated following the same procedures outlined in the Phase 1 review. The version of the model selected for further development incorporated an updated sediment initial condition, a numerical solution method for the chlorophyll a model, changes to light and phosphorus factors limiting algal growth, and a new pH-model regression, which removed Julian day dependence in order to avoid discontinuities in pH at year boundaries. This updated lake TMDL model was recalibrated using the extended dataset in order to compare calibration parameters to those obtained from a calibration with the original 7.5-year dataset. The resulting algal settling velocity calibrated from the extended dataset was more than twice the value calibrated with the original dataset, and, because the calibrated values of algal settling velocity and recycle rate are related (more rapid settling required more rapid recycling), the recycling rate also was larger than that determined with the original dataset. These changes in calibration parameters highlight the uncertainty in critical rates in the Upper Klamath Lake TMDL model and argue for their direct measurement in future data collection to increase confidence in the model predictions.

Oregon↗
USGS1991

Review of water demand and water utilization studies for the Provo River drainage basin, and review of a study of the effects of the proposed Jordanelle Reservoir on seepage to underground mines, Bonneville unit of the central Utah project

Problem: Questions have been raised concerning the adequacy of available water to fulfill the needs of storage, exchanges, diversions, and instream flows, pursuant to existing water rights in the Provo River drainage basin part of the Bonneville Unit. Also, concern has been expressed about the potential for seepage of water from Jordanelle Reservoir to underground mines. The Utah Congressional Delegation requested that the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) review the results of analyses performed by and for the USBR. Purpose and Scope: The purpose of this report is to present the results of the USGS review of (1) the hydrologic data, techniques, and model used by the USBR in their hydrologic analyses of the Provo River drainage basin and (2) the results of a study of the potential for seepage from the Jordanelle Reservoir to nearby underground mines. The USGS reviewed USBR-supplied water demands, water utilization studies, and models of seepage from Jordanelle Reservoir. The USBR estimated that about 90 percent of the water supply for Jordanelle Reservoir will be water from Strawberry Reservoir exchanged for water from the Provo River stored in Utah Lake. If the Utah State Engineer allows the USBR to claim an estimated 19,700 acre-feet of return flows from the CUP, only about 77 percent of the supply would be derived from exchange of existing water rights in Utah Lake. The USGS assumed that planned importations of water from the Uinta Basin will be available and deliverable to fulfill the proposed exchanges. Water rights and demands are important for determining water availability. The USGS did not conduct an independent review of water rights and demands. The USSR and Utah Division of Water Rights use different methods in some areas for determining stress on the system based on past records. The USSR used "historical observed diversions" and the Utah Division of Water Rights use "diversion entitlements", which may not be equal to the historical diversions. The USGS based its review upon water demands used by the USSR. The Utah Division of Water Rights has responsibility for granting and enforcing water rights, and the final decisions on how the rights will be adjudicated lies with the Utah Division of Water Rights and with the courts. The USGS review did not consider the draft water distribution plan for the Utah Lake drainage basin proposed by the Utah State Engineer (written commun., October 15,1991). This plan, when finalized, may have an effect on water availability to the CUP.

Utah↗
USGS2017

Developing an effective Agassiz's Desert Tortoise monitoring program: Final report to the Coachella Valley Conservation Commission

Agassiz’s desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) is a conservation-reliant species with populations north and west of the Colorado River protected as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (Averill-Murray et al. 2012). Since it was listed under this category in 1990, a great deal has been learned about the natural history of the species, and it is now one of the best-studied turtles in the United States (Lovich and Ennen 2013). However, the accumulated body of scientific data available for the species has not yet been translated into recovery or delisting of the species. Successful conservation of any species requires knowledge of their natural history and how vital rates affect their ability to maintain stable populations in the face of natural and anthropogenic stresses. Agassiz’s desert tortoises occur from southwestern Utah to near the Mexican border in California – a distance of over 450 km – but population densities vary greatly across this immense landscape (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2015). Tortoises occur in the Sonoran Desert of California, including the eastern and western ends of the Coachella Valley, where it is one of 27 species covered under the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and Natural Community Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP/NCCP). The southern portion of Joshua Tree National Park (JTNP) lies within this 1.1 million acre planning area, and was predicted to be an area of low-density tortoise populations using habitat suitability modeling (Barrows 2011). JTNP is near the southern distributional limit of G. agassizii, yet very little has been published regarding the ecology of tortoises in the Sonoran Desert of California. Reproductive output is an important gross measure of the ability of a population to persist. When integrated with data on fertility and survivorship, this information forms a foundation for assessing population status and formulating effective management strategies (e.g., Congdon et al. 1993, 1994), especially for imperiled species. One aspect of the biology of G. agassizii that has been particularly well-studied is reproductive output. However, most of what we know about this topic comes from research in the Mojave Desert portion of the species’ range (Ernst and Lovich 2009). Comparatively little has been published on the reproductive ecology of populations living in the Sonoran Desert ecosystem of California. Publications by Lovich et al. (1999, 2011, 2012, 2014, 2015) constitute the main body of literature on desert tortoise reproductive ecology in the Sonoran Desert of California, with one study population located at the western end of the CVMSHCP/NCCP area. Collecting data on Agassiz’s desert tortoise ecology in the Sonoran Desert ecosystem is important due to significant differences between the two adjacent desert ecosystems, especially the timing and amounts of annual precipitation, and their potential effects on reproductive output (e.g., Lovich et al. 5 2015). There are also differences in the vulnerability of tortoises to the effects of a warming, drying climate between the two deserts (Barrows 2011; Zylstra et al. 2012). The overall goal of this study was to collect data on demography, reproductive output, and genetic affinities at a study site in the Sonoran Desert portion of JTNP in the eastern end of the CVMSHCP/NCCP area. Specific objectives included: 1) Collect data to establish baselines on tortoise populations and/or their habitat suitability in core habitat within the CVNCCP area, including biotic and abiotic variables affecting persistence of tortoise populations; 2) Compare and contrast with data collected on desert tortoises at USGS/BLM study site near Palm Springs over 16 years; 3) Support long-term modeling efforts needed to determine tortoise population viability; 4) Refine modeled relationships with identified threats such as fire, invasive species and climate change; and 5) Prioritize adaptive management needs for the desert tortoise in and beyond the CVNCCP area. The data from this study will aid in determining baseline estimates of the desert tortoise population size within the planning area as well as establish a marked population of Agassiz’s desert tortoises for future monitoring. Data will be integrated with habitat modeling in order to refine model output. Genetic data will be collected on both the north and south sides of Interstate 10 to determine the potential effects of habitat fragmentation and genetic mixing. Analyses are ongoing and results beyond those presented in this report will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals following inclusion of additional data collected on the south side of Shavers Valley in 2017-2018.

Report↗
USGS2003

Methods for quality-assurance review of water-quality data in New Jersey

This report is an instructional and reference manual that describes methods developed and used by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), New Jersey District, to assure the accuracy and precision of the results of analyses of surface- and ground-water samples received from analyzing laboratories and, ultimately, to ensure the integrity of water-quality data in USGS databases and published reports. A statistical-analysis computer program, COMP.PPL, is used to determine whether the values reported by the laboratories are internally consistent, whether they are reasonable when compared with values for samples previously collected at the same site, and whether they exceed applicable drinking-water regulations. The program output consists of three files -- QWREVIEW, QWOUTLIERS, and QWCALC. QWREVIEW presents the results of tests of chemical logic and shows values that exceed drinking-water regulations. QWOUTLIERS identifies values that fall outside the historical range of values for the site sampled. QWCALC shows values and calculations used for reference purposes. Because values that are identified by the program as questionable may or may not be in error, the reviewer looks at both qualitative and quantitative relations between analytes during the period of record and then uses technical judgement to decide whether to accept a questionable value or investigate further. Guidelines for, and the use of regression analysis in, making this decision are described. Instructions are given for requesting that the analyzing laboratory reanalyze a constituent or otherwise verify the reported value. If, upon reanalysis or verification, a value is still questionable, consideration must be given to deleting the value or marking the value in the USGS National Water Information System database as having been reviewed and rejected.

New Jersey↗