Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Environmental Research Communications”

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 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
USGS2015

Sixth International Limnogeology Congress: field trip guidebook, Reno, Nevada, June 15-19, 2015

Limnogeology is the study of modern lakes and lake deposits in the geologic record. Limnogeologists have been active since the 1800s, but interest in Limnogeology became prevalent in the early 1990s when it became clear that lake deposits contain continental environmental and climate records. A society that is focused on Limnogeology would allow greater communication and access to research on these important subjects and contribute to providing sound science used to understand rapid global changes in our modern world; thus the International Association of Limnogeology was founded in 1995 at the first International Limnogeology Congress (ILIC) held in Copenhagen, Denmark. The Sixth International Limnogeology Congress (ILIC6) was held in Reno, Nevada, from June 15–19, 2015. The ILIC meetings have been held every 4 years since the first meeting in1995 and were subsequently convened in Brest, France (1999), Tucson, USA (2003), Barcelona, Spain (2007), and Konstanz, Germany (2011). The Congress in Reno, USA marks the second time the Congress has been held in the United States and more than 150 scientists from every part of the world participated. As part of the Congress, ILIC6 included pre- and post- Congress field trips, the descriptions of which are included as separate trips in this Open-File Report. Trip 1 provides information on the pluvial and post-glacial Lakes of the eastern Great Basin, led by Paul Jewell, University of Utah, Ben Laabs, State University of New York-Geneseo, Jeff Munroe, Middlebury College, and Jack Oviatt, Kansas State University. Trip 2 contains information on the lake sequences of closed-basin lakes in the Eocene Green River Formation in Wyoming, led by Michael Smith, Northern Arizona University and Jennifer Scott, Mount Royal University. Trip 3 provides the background for the field trip to Pleistocene and modern lakes in the Great Basin of North America that was led by Susan Zimmerman, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Ken Adams, Desert Research Institute, and Michael Rosen, U.S. Geological Survey. Trip 4 contains the information for a trip to the modern lakes in Lassen National Park that was led by Paula Noble and Kerry Howard, both from the University of Nevada, Reno. The U.S. Geological Survey has sponsored each ILIC that has been held in the United States because of the importance of understanding paleoclimate and contaminant histories of lakes, two main themes of the Congress. This field trip guide provides a permanent record of some of the wide variety of studies that are being conducted in modern lakes and ancient lake deposits in western North America, and it provides a starting point for any one desiring to visit these exceptional sites or begin work in these areas.

California, Nevada, Utah, Wyoming↗
USGS2019

Interactive mapping of nonindigenous species in the Laurentian Great Lakes

Nonindigenous species pose significant risks to the health and integrity of ecosystems around the world. Tracking and communicating the spread of these species has been of interest to ecologists and environmental managers for many years, particularly in the bi-national Laurentian Great Lakes of North America. In this paper, we introduce the Great Lakes Aquatic Nonindigenous Species Information System (GLANSIS) Map Explorer. The Map Explorer provides access to records of documented nonindigenous species and their spatial distributions. Users may view the distributions of well-known nonindigenous species (such as zebra mussels) as well as perform custom queries. Additional map layers allow users to compare the distribution of nonindigenous species to environmental conditions. This tool serves to communicate knowledge to diverse stakeholder groups and to enable further in-depth research on nonindigenous species.

Laurentian Great Lakes↗
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↗
USGS2002

HAZPAC: An interactive map of Pacific Rim natural hazards, population, and infrastructure

This is an online version of a CD-ROM publication. The text files that describe using this publication make reference to software provided on the disc. For this online version the software can be downloaded for free from Adobe Systems and Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. (ESRI). Welcome to HAZPAC! HAZPAC is an interactive map about natural hazard risk in the Pacific Rim region. It is intended to communicate to a broad audience the ideas of 'Crowding the Rim,' which is an international, public-private partnership that fosters collaborative solutions for regional risks. HAZPAC, which stands for 'HAZards of the PACific,' uses Geographic Information System (GIS) technology to help people visualize the socioeconomic connections and shared hazard vulnerabilities among Pacific Rim countries, as well as to explore the general nature of risk. Please refer to the 'INTRODUCTION TO HAZPAC' section of the readme file below to determine which HAZPAC project will be right for you. Once you have decided which HAZPAC project is suitable for you, please refer to the 'GETTING STARTED' sections in the readme file for some basic information that will help you begin using HAZPAC. Also, we highly recommend that you follow the Tutorial exercises in the project-specific HAZPAC User Guides. The User Guides are PDF (Portable Document Format) files that must be read with Adobe Acrobat Reader (a free copy of Acrobat Reader is available using the link near the bottom of this page).

Data Series↗
USGS2025

Insights and strategic opportunities from the USGS 2024 Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Interagency Workshop

Introduction In 2021, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) published Circular 1490 titled, “Integrated Science for the Study of Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in the Environment: A Strategic Science Vision for the U.S. Geological Survey” (Tokranov and others, 2021). Circular 1490 was created to be a resource for USGS scientists prioritizing and planning research related to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and to be a guide for developing partnerships with other scientists, State and Federal agencies, and stakeholders engaged in PFAS research and management and mitigation of the environmental and human-health effects of PFAS. This USGS PFAS Strategic Science Vision document was intended to be the foundation for a “living strategic vision,” periodically providing updates on the state of USGS PFAS research, emerging PFAS data gaps and needs, and progress on interagency and stakeholder PFAS partnerships and priorities. To meet this objective, the USGS planned to host an Interagency and Stakeholder PFAS Workshop every 2–3 years. During September 10–12, 2024, the USGS hosted the first Interagency and Stakeholder PFAS Workshop in Reston, Virginia. The Workshop brought together experts from other Federal agencies (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Food and Drug Administration, Department of Defense [Air Force, Army]), State agencies (Washington Fish and Wildlife, Virginia Department of Transportation), and academia (Harvard University, University of Maryland) to address key challenges relating to the measurement and modeling of PFAS and the implications for environmental health. Participants engaged in in-depth discussions centered around six pivotal topics related to PFAS: (1) sampling protocols, methods and interpretation; (2) environmental sources, source apportionment, and occurrence; (3) environmental fate and transport; (4) human and wildlife exposure routes and risk; (5) bioconcentration, bioaccumulation, and biomagnification; and (6) ecotoxicology and effects. Each topic had three breakout sessions. A recurrent theme of workshop discussions was how data on a nationwide scale for PFAS occurrence in various environmental matrices, including air, water, food crops, biota, soil, and streambed sediment could help to advance scientific understanding. Participants noted significant geospatial data gaps, particularly in the midwestern and southern United States and the Pacific Northwest. PFAS data collection tends to be more robust along the eastern seaboard and in California. Participants stressed how enhancing the integration of large and small datasets across various agencies could help to support national scale understanding of PFAS. To address these gaps, attendees suggested leveraging datasets from Federal entities like the USGS and the U.S. Department of Defense, State agencies, and municipal utility services to develop predictive contaminant detection and transport models. Improved coordination between water quality programs and USGS research could help to facilitate access to valuable data, leading to comprehensive databases that inform PFAS point (wastewater treatment plants and landfills) and nonpoint (runoff from land, atmospheric deposition, food packaging) sources, environmental transport mechanisms, environmental detection and concentrations, potential exposure routes, and health effects on different biota, including humans. A specific request was made to develop a map demarking the depth of modern (1953 or later) groundwater, which is susceptible to surface-derived anthropogenic (that is, human-made) contamination, based on tritium-age dating. Emphasis was placed on incorporation of hydrology, groundwater flow paths, groundwater–surface water interactions, and landscape factors in predictive statistical models as a step to improve contaminant source identification and tracking. Molecular fingerprinting approaches garnered attention as techniques to link specific PFAS mixtures detected in a sample to environmental sources and levels in biota (Dávila-Santiago and others, 2022). Integrating data from abiotic (that is, water, soil, and air) and biotic (that is, living organisms) systems identified as a research opportunity. For example, understanding the composition of soils and sediments, which include a mixture of mineral, plant, and animal components, could advance understanding of exposure pathways. The discussions highlighted opportunities to explore and understand the potential redistribution and biotic exposures of PFAS from biosolid and wastewater treatment plant effluent land application practices, in addition to atmospheric releases and discharges from landfill and wastewater treatment plants. Participants identified research gaps surrounding how these sources may contribute to contamination and may affect surrounding ecosystems, including a better definition of anthropogenic background concentrations. Moving forward, the collection of co-occurrence data was noted as a means to improve understanding of complex mixtures and to leverage companion modeling efforts focused on areas with high and low contamination levels to identify areas of concern and unaffected resources. Participants emphasized how centralized USGS databases and the establishment of sample-metadata archives can help to ensure that samples are preserved and accessible for future research. In conclusion, the workshop participants identified opportunities to bridge data gaps and improve measurement techniques, modeling frameworks, databases, and communication, to enhance the understanding of PFAS and their effects on environmental and human health. Upon completion of the workshop, participants indicated an interest in developing strategic data collection, modeling, and analytical approaches to address these challenges.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2002

Differences between nipher and slter shielded rain gages at two Colorado deposition monitoring sites

In the last decade the United States and Canada have made significant progress in establishing spatial ad temporal estimates of atmospheric deposition throughout North America. Fundamental to the wet-deposition portion of these estimates is the accurate and precise measurement of precipitation amount. Goodison and others (I-3) have reported on a new type of shielded snow gage known as the Canadian MSC Nipher shielded snow gage. Because this shielded snow gage has been shown to be superior to other precipitation gages for the estimation of snowfall amount, its design was adapted to the Universal Belfort precipitation gage (4), the dominant precipitation gage used at deposition monitoring sites in the United States. Favorable results taken from monitoring sites using this modified Nipher shielded snow gage (3-6) have prompted the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Electric Power Research Institute to adopt the Nipher shielded Belfort gage as a standard piece of equipment in the Acid MODES and Operational Evaluation Network (OEN) monitoring programs and to propose that is be included as a standard snow gage in other North American deposition monitoring programs. This communication details preliminary results from two of nine NADP/NTN deposition monitoring sites selected by the Environmental Protection Agency to compare Nipher shielded Belfort precipitation gage volumes to volumes obtained from the standard Belfort gage used in the NADP/NTN monitoring program.

Environmental Science & Technology↗
USGS1985

Environmental systems and management activities on the Kennedy Space Center, Merritt Island, Florida: results of a modeling workshop

In the early 1960's, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) began purchasing 140,000 acres on Merritt Island, Florida, in order to develop a center for space exploration. Most of this land was acquired to provide a safety and security buffer around NASA facilities. NASA, as the managing agency for the Kennedy Space Center (KSC), is responsible for preventing or controlling environmental pollution from the Federal facilities and activities at the Space Center and is committed to use all practicable means to protect and enhance the quality of the surrounding environment. The Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge was established in 1963 when management authority for undeveloped lands at KSC was transferred to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In addition to manage for 11 Federally-listed threatened and endangered species and other resident and migratory fish and wildlife populations, the Refuge has comanagement responsibility for 19,000 acres of mosquito control impoundments and 2,500 acres of citrus groves. The Canaveral National Seashore was developed in 1975 when management of a portion of the coastal lands was transferred from NASA to the National Park Service. This multiagency jurisdiction on Merritt Island has resulted in a complex management environment. The modeling workshop described in this report was conducted May 21-25, 1984, at the Kennedy Space Center to: (1) enhance communication among the agencies with management responsibilities on Merritt Island; (2) integrate available information concerning the development, management, and ecology of Merritt Island; and (3) identify key research and monitoring needs associated with the management and use of the island's resources. The workshop was structured around the formulation of a model that would simulate primary management and use activities on Merritt Island and their effects on upland, impoundment, and estuarine vegetation and associated wildlife. The simulation model is composed of four connected submodels. The Uplands submodel calculates changes in acres and structural components of vegetation communities resulting from succession, fire, facilities development, and shuttle launch depositions, as well as the quantity and quality of surface runoff and aquifer input to an impoundment and an estuary. The Impoundment submodel next determines water quality and quantity and changes in vegetation resulting from water level manipulation and prescribed burning. The Estuary submodel than determines water quality parameters and acres of seagrass beds. Finally, the Wildlife submodel calculates habitat suitability indices for key species of interest, based on vegetation conditions in the uplands and impoundments and on several hydrologic parameters. The model represents a hypothetical management unit with 2,500 acres of uplands, a 600-acre impoundment, and a 1,500-acre section of estuary. Two management scenarios were run to analyze model behavior. The scenarios differ in the frequency of shuttle launches and prescribed burning, the extent of facilities development, the amount of land disposed waste material applied, and the nature and timing of impoundment water level control. Early in a model development project, the process of building the model is usually of greater benefit than the model itself. The model building process stimulates interaction among agencies, assists in integrating existing information, and helps identify research needs. These benefits usually accrue even in the absence of real predictive power in the resulting model. Open communication occurs among the Federal, State, and local agencies involved with activities on Merritt Island and the agencies have a cooperative working relationship. The workshop provided an opportunity for all of these agencies to meet at one time and have focused discussions on the key environmental and multiagency resource management issues. The workshop framework helped to integrate information and assumptions from a number of disciplines and agencies. This integration occurred in the computer simulation model and among workshop participants as submodel linkages were developed and scenario results discussed. A number of research needs were identified at the workshop during the model building and testing exercises and associated discussions. These needs were based on the informed judgement of researchers and managers familiar with Merritt Island or similar areas, rather than on a comprehensive literature review of sensitivity analysis of the preliminary model developed at the workshop. Some of the needs can be addressed by interpreting the results of completed studies from similar geographic areas as they relate to Merritt Island, while other will require additional research studies on Merritt Island. Major research needs associated with the Upland submodel include behavior of the near-surface aquifer, factors limiting slash pine regeneration, frequency and effects of natural fire on various cover types, cumulative effects of shuttle launches, and fate in upland soils of nitrogen and phosphorous from land applied waste material. Key Impoundment submodel needs include documentation of vegetation changes in response to altered water depth, salinity, and nutrient concentrations and better specification of the functional characteristics of impoundments as chemical filters. Important information gaps identified in the Estuary submodel include a more complete analysis of factors contributing to phytoplankton abundance, evaluation of sources of turbidity other than phytoplankton, and identification and quantification of factors limiting seagrass distribution. Primary research needs associated with the Wildlife submodel include a survey of breeding habitat, production data, and harvest data for mottled ducks; data on the emigration and immigration of juvenile mullet (and other transient fish) in the impoundment; the contribution of various seagrasses to habitat requirements of sea trout; and the effects of dissolved oxygen on survival of juvenile sea trout. Ideally, the modeling workshop process is iterative in nature. Periods between workshops are used for research, data collection, and model refinement. Each workshop integrates information collected since the last workshop and produces a more credible model that is more useful in evaluating management alternatives. Participants felt that continued application of this process would help provide ongoing integration and communication among agencies and would allow each agency's planning and management activities to be viewed within the context of an overall assessment.

Report↗
USGS2025

Evapotranspiration terminology and definitions

Evapotranspiration (ET), the combined process of evaporation from soil and plant surfaces and transpiration from plant tissue, plays a pivotal role in the global water and energy balance. Accurately quantifying ET at various spatial scales is important for diverse applications, including irrigation and natural resource management. While efforts to standardize ET methodology have progressed over the last few decades, some confusion and disagreements in terminology persist among communities of researchers and practitioners involved in the measurement, estimation, and simulation of ET. This technical note addresses the historical evolution and standardization of ET terminology, aiming to reduce and mitigate disparities in definitions and usage by advocating for standardized definitions and emphasizing the adoption of reference ET ( ET ref ) terminology to promote consistency and accuracy and to avoid ambiguity. This document provides comprehensive definitions of key terms, including crop (i.e., vegetation cover) coefficients, consumptive use (CU), actual crop evapotranspiration ( ET a ), and ET ref variants for short (grass, ET o ) and tall (alfalfa, ET r ) reference crops. Practical discussion on several relevant topics is given: (1) single and dual crop coefficient approaches, (2) applications to nonagricultural vegetation, (3) recommended subscripts for terms, (4) practical guidelines and considerations for ET ref calculation, (5) encouragement to replace “potential ET” terminology with better terms, (6) clarification on maximum ET ( ET max ) and maximum crop coefficient ( K c max ) terms, (7) ET products derived from remote sensing, (8) a brief description of the role of ET in water rights, and (9) a figure illustrating the use of the terms defined herein. The conclusion emphasizes the importance of consistent terminology for effective communication among researchers and end-users, which will facilitate the adoption of standardized ET methods and technologies. This technical note was created by the American Society of Civil Engineers, Environmental and Water Resources Institute (ASCE-EWRI), Evapotranspiration in Irrigation and Hydrology Committee, with input and endorsement from other relevant organizations in the United States and internationally. This note serves as a comprehensive reference guide for ET practitioners and researchers.

Irrigation and Drainage Engineering↗
USGS2007

Striving for collaborative science and communication through the Consortium for Research and Education on Emerging Contaminants (CREEC)

Current analytical capabilities are allowing scientists to identify possible contaminants in the environment that were previously unmonitored or were present at concentrations too low for detection. New scientific evidence about the exposure pathways and potential impacts of some of these compounds on human or environmental health is regularly being published (Woodling et al., 2006; Drewes et al., 2005; Kinney et al., 2006; Gibs et al., 2007; Veldhoen et al., 2006). Recent news headlines have declared potential human health and ecological concerns regarding the occurrence of personal care products and pharmaceuticals in our environment. These are products that we regularly use (or create) in our homes, businesses, farms and industry, including plasticizers, flame retardants, detergents, pesticides and herbicides, antibacterial agents, steroids, antibiotics, and disinfection byproducts. These ‘emerging contaminants’ (ECs) are compounds that have recently been shown to occur widely in one or more environmental media, have been identified as being a potential public health or ecological risk, and yet adequate data are lacking to determine their actual risk (Younos, 2005; Soin and Smagghe, 2007; Hutchinson, 2007).

Water Resources Impact↗
USGS2023

The Government eDNA Working Group 6th Annual eDNA Technical Exchange Workshop

The 6th annual Environmental DNA (eDNA) Technical Exchange Workshop was a virtual workshop hosted and coordinated by the Government eDNA Working Group (GEDWG) on January 24–26, 2023. GEDWG is a no-cost consortium that focuses on bringing together stakeholders associated with federal, state, provincial, municipal, and other government and non-government agencies interested in eDNA and related fields, for the purposes of sharing technical expertise and experience during monthly discussion meetings and annual workshops. Over 400 participants registered for the virtual Workshop, which featured four keynote speakers, 23 platform talks, eight short-form poster presentations, and an extended discussion session. Workshop attendees represented a broad cross-section of disciplines and backgrounds, including research scientists, natural resource managers, and conservation policy experts, and many different government agencies, private environmental consulting firms, trade organizations, non-governmental organizations, and others in the environmental management sector. Key takeaways from the workshop included moving the application of eDNA into resource management and discovering ways to improve policy uptake in the development of nationwide biodiversity monitoring, some of which is happening in the development of eDNA networks and national strategies. Future research directions discussed include studies of fate and transport, autonomous sampling/sample processing, and reference library curation. Additionally, co-design of studies and improved engagement and communication among scientists and managers are needed to ensure clear expectations and outcomes.

Environmental DNA↗
USGS2018

A critical time for mercury science to inform global policy

Mercury is a global pollutant released into the biosphere by varied human activities including coal combustion, mining, artisanal gold mining, cement production, and chemical production. Once released to air, land and water, the addition of carbon atoms to mercury by bacteria results in the production of methylmercury, the toxic form that bioaccumulates in aquatic and terrestrial food chains resulting in elevated exposure to humans and wildlife. Global recognition of the mercury contamination problem has resulted in the Minamata Convention on Mercury, which came into force in 2017. The treaty aims to protect human health and the environment from human-generated releases of mercury curtailing its movement and transformations in the biosphere. Coincident with the treaty’s coming into force, the 13th International Conference of Mercury as a Global Pollutant (ICMGP-13) was held in Providence, Rhode Island USA. At ICMGP-13, cutting edge research was summarized and presented to address questions relating to global and regional sources and cycling of mercury, how that mercury is methylated, the effects of mercury exposure on humans and wildlife, and the science needed for successful implementation of the Minamata Convention. Human activities have the potential to enhance mercury methylation by remobilizing previously released mercury, and increasing methylation efficiency. This synthesis concluded that many of the most important factors influencing the fate and effects of mercury and its more toxic form, methylmercury, stem from environmental changes that are much broader in scope than mercury releases alone. Alterations of mercury cycling, methylmercury bioavailability and trophic transfer due to climate and land use changes remain critical uncertainties in effective implementation of the Minamata Convention. In the face of these uncertainties, important policy and management actions are needed over the short-term to support the control of mercury releases to land, water and air. These include adequate monitoring and communication on risk from exposure to various forms of inorganic mercury as well as methylmercury from fish and rice consumption. Successful management of global and local mercury pollution will require integration of mercury research and policy in a changing world.

Environmental Science & Technology↗
USGS2022

Science mission requirements for a globally ranging, riserless drilling vessel for U.S. Scientific Ocean Drilling

Through the collection and analysis of shallow and deep subseafloor sediments, rocks, fluids, and life, scientific ocean drilling has enriched our understanding of the complex Earth system. Among other achievements, scientific ocean drilling has documented the history of Earth’s climate, the waxing and waning of polar ice sheets, the past changes in ocean and atmospheric circulation, the existence and function of microbial life in the subseafloor, the compositional variations in Earth’s crust and underlying mantle, and the physical and chemical processes acting at subduction zones, including those associated with tsunamigenic earthquakes. Over the decades, more than 12,000 articles that depend on analyses of scientific ocean drilling samples and geophysical data have been published, many detailing breakthrough contributions to global knowledge about the Earth system. Approximately 45% of these publications were led by U.S.-affiliated authors (International Ocean Discovery Program Publication Services, 2021). Since the mid-1980s, the workhorse of this multidisciplinary, international research effort has been the riserless D/V JOIDES Resolution, operated by Texas A&M University with funding from the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). D/V JOIDES Resolution has conducted the vast majority of scientific ocean drilling expeditions and collected most of the scientific cores over that period, including 82% of the expeditions and 93% of the cores in the last decade alone, despite being one of three platforms that is operated within the International Ocean Discovery Program. However, D/V JOIDES Resolution is approaching the end of its useful life. With a strong commitment to continue scientific ocean drilling beyond the end of the current phase, the community developed a document outlining the research frontiers that should be pursued. Exploring Earth by Scientific Ocean Drilling: 2050 Science Framework (Koppers and Coggon, 2020) describes seven scientific strategic objectives that focus on understanding interconnections within the Earth system and five flagship initiatives that integrate these objectives into long-term research efforts that address issues facing society. Additional elements in the 2050 Science Framework, including STEM education, workforce development, technology development, and innovative applications of data analytics, will advance the goals of scientific ocean drilling. Addressing the 2050 Science Framework also requires building partnerships with allied U.S. and international science programs and strengthening existing ones. To implement a significant portion of the 2050 Science Framework, the U.S. scientific community seeks to lease or acquire a newly built, globally ranging, state-of-the art, riserless drilling vessel. The many and varied technical and human resources requirements for successful accomplishment of scientific and educational goals summarized in this document and described in detail in the 2050 Science Framework require broad community input and careful consideration. Following receipt of NSF’s formal Request for Assistance to the United States Science Support Program (USSSP), the U.S. scientific ocean drilling community conducted a one-year exercise to identify its national scientific needs and priorities in order to determine the Science Mission Requirements (SMRs) presented here. This community effort included: (1) a U.S. community-wide survey to identify the specific operational and technical capabilities critical to addressing science in the 2050 Science Framework; (2) a series of online workshops focusing on critical capabilities identified by the survey; and (3) a large in-person workshop to synthesize the results of the survey and the virtual workshops (Appendix 1). The approach was designed to reach as many participants as possible. Overall, 278 survey responses were received from U.S. community members, representing 104 unique institutions from 39 states and the District of Columbia, and 137 unique individuals participated in the workshops (Appendix 2). The results of this effort comprise two classes of SMRs: Foundational Science Mission Requirements and Primary Science Mission Requirements. Foundational SMRs define minimum criteria for a new riserless drilling vessel that can address significant portions of the 2050 Science Framework. Primary SMRs build upon the Foundational SMRs and will create more robust science opportunities and data collection capabilities, will increase progress in addressing the 2050 Science Framework objectives, and will provide more real-time ship-to-shore interaction to improve science productivity, engagement, and outreach. Modern safety and environmental standards, including meeting standards to access protected waters such as exclusive economic zones, extended continental shelves, or high latitudes, while being cognizant of the vessel’s environmental footprint. Safe and efficient operations in global locations and in water depths from 70 m to 6000+ m, with total drill string length of at least 7000 m. High-quality core and data collection from a range of key subseafloor environments. Advanced heave compensation, dynamic positioning, and drill pipe stability. Modern mud and cement/casing systems. Critical onboard measurements for safety, operational decision-making, documentation of ephemeral properties, mission-specific science, and long-term science goals that extend beyond a single expedition. Designated and appropriate space for sample and data preservation. Highly skilled onboard personnel, including technical staff for curation and core handling; support for safety, time-sensitive, and critical shipboard measurements; computer support; equipment and instrument repair; application support; and data assurance. Primary Science Mission Requirements include: Flexible shipboard space for laboratories and on deck to ensure safe, successful implementation of diverse science objectives and operations. Minimizing contamination of recovered samples. Over-the-side capabilities for science-supporting technology (e.g., remotely operated vehicles, water- column sampling, sediment-water interface sampling). Downhole logging and measurements. Expanded borehole observatory capabilities. Reliable and consistent ship-to-shore communications. NSF’s investment in a new globally ranging, riserless drilling vessel will have a powerful economic multiplier effect, including the infusion of additional science support funds in the United States for training and research, the development of new technologies and tools, and the associated scientific and technical workforce development. The skills and knowledge gained through scientific ocean drilling are translatable to careers in fields such as sustainable energy development (e.g., geothermal and offshore wind), carbon sequestration, data management and cyberinfrastructure, biotechnology, communications, science education, policy, hazard mitigation, and environmental management. The United States is a leader in a well-established and internationally collaborative scientific ocean drilling community. A modern, globally ranging, riserless drilling vessel will allow the United States to expand its leadership position, address broad scientific questions that current capabilities preclude, and cultivate equitable international, multidisciplinary collaborations that will ensure scientific ocean drilling’s future success.

Report↗
USGS2020

Ecological risk assessment of environmental stress and bioactive chemicals to riverine fish populations: An individual-based model of smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu

Ecological risk assessments play an important role in environmental management and decision-making. Although empirical measurements of the effects of habitat changes and chemical exposure are often made at molecular and individual levels, environmental decision-making often requires the quantification of management-relevant, population-level outcomes. In this study, we generalized a modeling framework to evaluate population-level ecological risk of environmental stress and bioactive chemicals. The modeling framework includes (1) a biological model module that incorporates complex and interacting biological and ecological processes, and environmental stochasticity, (2) an effect module that links the impacts of environmental changes and chemical exposure to individual characteristics, and (3) a population module that makes decisions on the choice of population-level properties to best capture the effects and thus to track in the model based on the target species and the research and management interest. This framework is a 3-module procedure that provides an alternative way for researchers to organize, present and communicate the risk assessment modeling studies. To demonstrate this framework, we used a socioeconomically important riverine fish species, smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu , as the model species. We developed an individual-based model as the biological model module. We evaluated the impacts of changing water temperature and flow regimes, and the impacts of exposure to estrogenic endocrine disrupting compounds (EEDC) on smallmouth bass populations in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed, USA. Warm summer water temperatures and year-round high flows had the most severe impacts on the smallmouth bass population. An increase in exposure level to EEDC, both year-round and in summer months, substantially reduced population size, spawner and recruit abundance, and the proportion of quality-length individuals. Acute exposure to EEDC was more detrimental to the population than chronic exposure. Acute exposure during spawning season had the most severe impacts. This modeling framework can be extended to other species, environmental factors and chemicals, and can be used to inform management and conservation decisions.

Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virgin↗
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↗
USGS2026

Seasons and seasonality in lakes: Synthesis amid global change

Seasonality in environmental conditions plays a fundamental role in shaping lake ecosystems. However, patterns of seasonality vary worldwide, and these patterns are shifting over time amid global change. Thus, it is increasingly important to evaluate how seasons and seasonality are represented in lake ecosystem research. Here, we used a literature review and global data analysis to synthesize approaches for conceptualizing seasons and seasonality in lakes. We found that a wide range of criteria are used to delineate discrete seasons in published literature, including fixed dates (e.g., months, solstice/equinox), environmental thresholds (e.g., temperature and precipitation cutoffs), and lake-specific indicators (e.g., ice cover, plankton phenology). Analyzing data from lakes worldwide, we found that using different criteria to define the same season resulted in divergent interpretations of ecosystem states. Based on our synthesis, we offer recommendations for how to incorporate seasonality into lake research and communications amid global change.

Limnology and Oceanography Letters↗
USGS2024

Critical considerations for communicating environmental DNA science

The economic and methodological efficiencies of environmental DNA (eDNA) based survey approaches provide an unprecedented opportunity to assess and monitor aquatic environments. However, instances of inadequate communication from the scientific community about confidence levels, knowledge gaps, reliability, and appropriate parameters of eDNA-based methods have hindered their uptake in environmental monitoring programs and, in some cases, has created misperceptions or doubts in the management community. To help remedy this situation, scientists convened a session at the Second National Marine eDNA Workshop to discuss strategies for improving communications with managers. These include articulating the readiness of different eDNA applications, highlighting the strengths and limitations of eDNA tools for various applications or use cases, communicating uncertainties associated with specified uses transparently, and avoiding the exaggeration of exploratory and preliminary findings. Several key messages regarding implementation, limitations, and relationship to existing methods were prioritized. To be inclusive of the diverse managers, practitioners, and researchers, we and the other workshop participants propose the development of communication workflow plans, using RACI (Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed) charts to clarify the roles of all pertinent individuals and parties and to minimize the chance for miscommunications. We also propose developing decision support tools such as Structured Decision-Making (SDM) to help balance the benefits of eDNA sampling with the inherent uncertainty, and developing an eDNA readiness scale to articulate the technological readiness of eDNA approaches for specific applications. These strategies will increase clarity and consistency regarding our understanding of the utility of eDNA-based methods, improve transparency, foster a common vision for confidently applying eDNA approaches, and enhance their benefit to the monitoring and assessment community.

Environmental DNA↗
USGS2000

U.S. Geological Survey coastal and marine geology research; recent highlights and achievements

The USGS Coastal and Marine Geology Program has large-scale national and regional research projects that focus on environmental quality, geologic hazards, natural resources, and information transfer. This Circular highlights recent scientific findings of the program, which play a vital role in the USGS endeavor to understand human interactions with the natural environment and to determine how the fundamental geologic processes controlling the Earth work. The scientific knowledge acquired through USGS research and monitoring is critically needed by planners, government agencies, and the public. Effective communication of the results of this research will enable the USGS Coastal and Marine Geology Program to play an integral part in assisting the Nation in responding the pressing Earth science challenges of the 21st century.

Circular↗
USGS1981

Results of a modeling workshop concerning preservation and protection of wetlands in North Dakota

In a recently signed letter, the Governor of North Dakota and the Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Fish and Wildlife and Parks charged a joint state-federal study group with examination of two separate questions: 1) mitigation for the Garrison Diversion Project; and 2) planning for long-range protection and preservation of fish and wildlife habitat in North Dakota. The cochair for this study group (the Secretary of the Interior's Field Representative, Denver, Colorado, and the Natural Resources Coordinator for North Dakota) further articulated the charge concerning the second of these two questions to include three steps: 1) development of a general plan for preservation and protection of migratory waterfowl and their associated wetland habitat; 2) a comprehensive analysis of alternative strategies, including opportunities and constraints, for achieving the goals articulated in Step 1; and 3) design of a coordinated state-federal public information program to assist in plan implementation. In order to obtain input from a variety of interests, the joint study group initiated step 2 activities with a five-day workshop in Bismarck, N. D.; December 8-12, 1980. The objectives of the workshop were: 1) to identify alternative strategies for preserving and enhancing waterfowl production habitat in North Dakota; 2) to identify opportunities and constraints associated with those alternatives; and 3) to promote communication and understanding of the implications of those alternatives for all affected parties. To achieve these objectives, the workshop utilized a group of concepts and techniques collectively known as Adaptive Environmental Assessment (AEA). Developed by Dr. C. S. Holling and his co-workers at the University of British Columbia, the AEA process involves planners, managers, scientists, and other interested parties in a structures atmosphere whose focus is the construction and examination of a computerized simulation model of the resource system under consideration. The modeling process is used to promote communication, identify pertinent issues, identify key data gaps and uncertainties, direct research efforts to fill those gaps, and explore the possible consequences of various management alternatives. The workshop, which was facilitated by the AEA Group of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), was attended by approximately 25 invited participants representing a variety of interests concerned with the wetlands protection issue in North Dakota. During the week workshop participants conceptualized and constructed a computerized simulation model incorporating many of the hydrologic, agricultural, and wildlife aspects of the wetlands issue. During the process of constructing this model and examining its behavior, participants identified several interesting alternative strategies that may prove useful in an overall wetland protection program, along with a variety of constraints associated with each. Perhaps the most interesting of these alternatives revolve around the idea that there may be a variety of cases in which water can be retained on the land, with concommitant benefits both for wildlife and flood control, without detriment to agricultural productivity. Examples of this kind of activity include flooding of previously drained Type I wetlands in summer fallow areas, installation of smaller drains in Type I and III wetlands to reduce the rate at which water runs off in the spring, and use of strategically located gates in drainage channels associated with the state highway system to slow runoff and create wetland habitat. Several other alternatives discussed at the workshop are related to the notion of using available, uncommitted water supplied to enhance or create wetlands. Several cases were cited in which more certain water supplies would be useful in increasing waterfowl production or reducing disease problems, especially in dry years. Water for such purposes might come from a variety of current of proposed water development projects, both large and small scale. Finally, the potential for re-establishment of "unsuccessfully" drained (i.e., not consistently usable for agricultural purposes) wetlands was discussed at some length. There are apparently substantial acreages of such wetlands in North Dakota and a program to acquire and rehabilitate them might be of considerable utility. The workshop was thus successful in accomplishing its first two objectives--identification of alternative strategies, opportunities, and constraints. However, it would be naive to suppose that any of the alternatives discussed offers a complete, simple solution to the wetlands issue in North Dakota. The most important result of the workshop may therefore be that which was accomplished relative to the third objective--promotion of communication and understanding. It was gratifying and encouraging to see the spirit of communication and cooperation that developed by the end of the workshop. The fact that representatives of many of the interests concerned with the wetlands issue participated in an open exchange of ideas and information marks an important step forward. We believe that it is imperative that this cooperative attitude be maintained, and that there are a variety of ways in which this might be accomplished. Perhaps the simplest would be a small-scale pilot project and research effort to determine the effects of wetland maintenance on summer fallow areas. Such a research program would provide not only useful information, but an opportunity for many of the affected interests to begin working toward mutually acceptable solutions to the overall wetlands issue.

North Dakota↗