Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Natural Resource Data Series”

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 415 records · Page 23Linked to original sources

National Land Cover Database 2001 (NLCD01) Tile 1, Northwest United States: NLCD01_1

This 30-meter data set represents land use and land cover for the conterminous United States for the 2001 time period. The data have been arranged into four tiles to facilitate timely display and manipulation within a Geographic Information System (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/nlcd01-partition.jpg). The National Land Cover Data Set for 2001 was produced through a cooperative project conducted by the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC) Consortium. The MRLC Consortium is a partnership of Federal agencies (http://www.mrlc.gov), consisting of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). One of the primary goals of the project is to generate a current, consistent, seamless, and accurate National Land Cover Database (NLCD) circa 2001 for the United States at medium spatial resolution. For a detailed definition and discussion on MRLC and the NLCD 2001 products, refer to Homer and others (2004), (see: http://www.mrlc.gov/mrlc2k.asp). The NLCD 2001 was created by partitioning the United States into mapping zones. A total of 68 mapping zones (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/nlcd01-mappingzones.jpg), were delineated within the conterminous United States based on ecoregion and geographical characteristics, edge-matching features, and the size requirement of Landsat mosaics. Mapping zones encompass the whole or parts of several states. Questions about the NLCD mapping zones can be directed to the NLCD 2001 Land Cover Mapping Team at the USGS/EROS, Sioux Falls, SD (605) 594-6151 or mrlc@usgs.gov.

Data Series↗

National Land Cover Database 2001 (NLCD01) Tile 3, Southwest United States: NLCD01_3

This 30-meter data set represents land use and land cover for the conterminous United States for the 2001 time period. The data have been arranged into four tiles to facilitate timely display and manipulation within a Geographic Information System (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/nlcd01-partition.jpg).The National Land Cover Data Set for 2001 was produced through a cooperative project conducted by the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC) Consortium. The MRLC Consortium is a partnership of Federal agencies (http://www.mrlc.gov), consisting of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). One of the primary goals of the project is to generate a current, consistent, seamless, and accurate National Land Cover Database (NLCD) circa 2001 for the United States at medium spatial resolution. For a detailed definition and discussion on MRLC and the NLCD 2001 products, refer to Homer and others (2004), (see: http://www.mrlc.gov/mrlc2k.asp). The NLCD 2001 was created by partitioning the United States into mapping zones. A total of 68 mapping zones (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/nlcd01-mappingzones.jpg), were delineated within the conterminous United States based on ecoregion and geographical characteristics, edge-matching features, and the size requirement of Landsat mosaics. Mapping zones encompass the whole or parts of several states. Questions about the NLCD mapping zones can be directed to the NLCD 2001 Land Cover Mapping Team at the USGS/EROS, Sioux Falls, SD (605) 594-6151 or mrlc@usgs.gov.

Data Series↗

National Land Cover Database 2001 (NLCD01) Tile 4, Southeast United States: NLCD01_4

This 30-meter data set represents land use and land cover for the conterminous United States for the 2001 time period. The data have been arranged into four tiles to facilitate timely display and manipulation within a Geographic Information System (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/nlcd01-partition.jpg). The National Land Cover Data Set for 2001 was produced through a cooperative project conducted by the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC) Consortium. The MRLC Consortium is a partnership of Federal agencies (http://www.mrlc.gov), consisting of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). One of the primary goals of the project is to generate a current, consistent, seamless, and accurate National Land Cover Database (NLCD) circa 2001 for the United States at medium spatial resolution. For a detailed definition and discussion on MRLC and the NLCD 2001 products, refer to Homer and others (2004), (see: http://www.mrlc.gov/mrlc2k.asp). The NLCD 2001 was created by partitioning the United States into mapping zones. A total of 68 mapping zones (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/nlcd01-mappingzones.jpg), were delineated within the conterminous United States based on ecoregion and geographical characteristics, edge-matching features, and the size requirement of Landsat mosaics. Mapping zones encompass the whole or parts of several states. Questions about the NLCD mapping zones can be directed to the NLCD 2001 Land Cover Mapping Team at the USGS/EROS, Sioux Falls, SD (605) 594-6151 or mrlc@usgs.gov.

Data Series↗

Time-domain electromagnetic soundings collected in Dawson County, Nebraska, 2007-09

Between April 2007 and November 2009, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Central Platte Natural Resources District, collected time-domain electro-magnetic (TDEM) soundings at 14 locations in Dawson County, Nebraska. The TDEM soundings provide information pertaining to the hydrogeology at each of 23 sites at the 14 locations; 30 TDEM surface geophysical soundings were collected at the 14 locations to develop smooth and layered-earth resistivity models of the subsurface at each site. The soundings yield estimates of subsurface electrical resistivity; variations in subsurface electrical resistivity can be correlated with hydrogeologic and stratigraphic units. Results from each sounding were used to calculate resistivity to depths of approximately 90-130 meters (depending on loop size) below the land surface. Geonics Protem 47 and 57 systems, as well as the Alpha Geoscience TerraTEM, were used to collect the TDEM soundings (voltage data from which resistivity is calculated). For each sounding, voltage data were averaged and evaluated statistically before inversion (inverse modeling). Inverse modeling is the process of creating an estimate of the true distribution of subsurface resistivity from the mea-sured apparent resistivity obtained from TDEM soundings. Smooth and layered-earth models were generated for each sounding. A smooth model is a vertical delineation of calculated apparent resistivity that represents a non-unique estimate of the true resistivity. Ridge regression (Interpex Limited, 1996) was used by the inversion software in a series of iterations to create a smooth model consisting of 24-30 layers for each sounding site. Layered-earth models were then generated based on results of smooth modeling. The layered-earth models are simplified (generally 1 to 6 layers) to represent geologic units with depth. Throughout the area, the layered-earth models range from 2 to 4 layers, depending on observed inflections in the raw data and smooth model inversions. The TDEM data collected were considered good results on the basis of root mean square errors calculated after inversion modeling, comparisons with borehole geophysical logging, and repeatability.

Nebraska↗

Simulation of groundwater and surface-water flow in the upper Deschutes Basin, Oregon

This report describes a hydrologic model for the upper Deschutes Basin in central Oregon developed using the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) integrated Groundwater and Surface-Water Flow model (GSFLOW). The upper Deschutes Basin, which drains much of the eastern side of the Cascade Range in Oregon, is underlain by large areas of permeable volcanic rock. That permeability, in combination with the large annual precipitation at high elevations, results in a substantial regional aquifer system and a stream system that is heavily groundwater dominated. The upper Deschutes Basin is also an area of expanding population and increasing water demand for public supply and agriculture. Surface water was largely developed for agricultural use by the mid-20th century, and is closed to additional appropriations. Consequently, water users look to groundwater to satisfy the growing demand. The well‑documented connection between groundwater and the stream system, and the institutional and legal restrictions on streamflow depletion by wells, resulted in the Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD) instituting a process whereby additional groundwater pumping can be permitted only if the effects to streams are mitigated, for example, by reducing permitted surface-water diversions. Implementing such a program requires understanding of the spatial and temporal distribution of effects to streams from groundwater pumping. A groundwater model developed in the early 2000s by the USGS and OWRD has been used to provide insights into the distribution of streamflow depletion by wells, but lacks spatial resolution in sensitive headwaters and spring areas. The integrated model developed for this project, based largely on the earlier model, has a much finer grid spacing allowing resolution of sensitive headwater streams and important spring areas, and simulates a more complete set of surface processes as well as runoff and groundwater flow. In addition, the integrated model includes improved representation of subsurface geology and explicitly simulates the effects of hydrologically important fault zones not included in the previous model. The upper Deschutes Basin GSFLOW model was calibrated using an iterative trial and error approach using measured water-level elevations (water levels) from 800 wells, 144 of which have time series of 10 or more measurements. Streamflow was calibrated using data from 21 gage locations. At 14 locations where measured flows are heavily influenced by reservoir operations and irrigation diversions, so called “ naturalized ” flows, with the effects of reservoirs and diversion removed, developed by the Bureau of Reclamation, were used for calibration. Surface energy and moisture processes such as solar radiation, snow accumulation and melting, and evapotranspiration were calibrated using national datasets as well as data from long-term measurement sites in the basin. The calibrated Deschutes GSFLOW model requires daily precipitation, minimum and maximum air temperature data, and monthly data describing groundwater pumping and artificial recharge from leaking irrigation canals (which are a significant source of groundwater recharge). The calibrated model simulates the geographic distribution of hydraulic head over the 5,000 ft range measured in the basin, with a median absolute residual of about 53 ft. Temporal variations in head resulting from climate cycles, pumping, and canal leakage are well simulated over the model area. Simulated daily streamflow matches gaged flows or calculated naturalized flows for streams including the Crooked and Metolius Rivers, and lower parts of the mainstem Deschutes River. Seasonal patterns of runoff are less well fit in some upper basin streams. Annual water balances of streamflow are good over most of the model domain. Model fit and overall capabilities are appropriate for the objectives of the project. The integrated model results confirm findings from other studies and models indicating that most streamflow in the upper Deschutes Basin comes directly from groundwater discharge. The integrated model provides additional insights about the components of streamflow including direct groundwater discharge to streams, interflow, groundwater discharge to the land surface (Dunnian flow), and direct runoff (Hortonian flow). The new model provides improved capability for exploring the timing and distribution of streamflow capture by wells, and the hydrologic response to changes in other external stresses such as canal operation, irrigation, and drought. Because the model uses basic meteorological data as the primary input; and simulates surface energy and moisture balances, groundwater recharge and flow, and all components of streamflow; it is well suited for exploring the hydrologic response to climate change, although no such simulations are included in this report. The model was developed as a tool for future application; however, example simulations are provided in this report. In the example simulations, the model is used to explore the influence of well location and geologic structure on stream capture by pumping wells. Wells were simulated at three locations within a 12-mi area close to known groundwater discharge areas and crossed by a regional fault zone. Simulations indicate that the magnitude and timing of stream capture from pumping is largely controlled by the geographic location of the wells, but that faults can have a large influence on the propagation of pumping stresses.

Oregon↗

National Land Cover Database 2001 (NLCD01)

This 30-meter data set represents land use and land cover for the conterminous United States for the 2001 time period. The data have been arranged into four tiles to facilitate timely display and manipulation within a Geographic Information System (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/nlcd01-partition.jpg). The National Land Cover Data Set for 2001 was produced through a cooperative project conducted by the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC) Consortium. The MRLC Consortium is a partnership of Federal agencies (http://www.mrlc.gov), consisting of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). One of the primary goals of the project is to generate a current, consistent, seamless, and accurate National Land Cover Database (NLCD) circa 2001 for the United States at medium spatial resolution. For a detailed definition and discussion on MRLC and the NLCD 2001 products, refer to Homer and others (2004), (see: http://www.mrlc.gov/mrlc2k.asp). The NLCD 2001 was created by partitioning the United States into mapping zones. A total of 68 mapping zones (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/nlcd01-mappingzones.jpg), were delineated within the conterminous United States based on ecoregion and geographical characteristics, edge-matching features, and the size requirement of Landsat mosaics. Mapping zones encompass the whole or parts of several states. Questions about the NLCD mapping zones can be directed to the NLCD 2001 Land Cover Mapping Team at the USGS/EROS, Sioux Falls, SD (605) 594-6151 or mrlc@usgs.gov.

Data Series↗

National Land Cover Database 2001 (NLCD01) Imperviousness Layer Tile 1, Northwest United States: IMPV01_1

This 30-meter resolution data set represents the imperviousness layer for the conterminous United States for the 2001 time period. The data have been arranged into four tiles to facilitate timely display and manipulation within a Geographic Information System, browse graphic: nlcd01-partition. The National Land Cover Data Set for 2001 was produced through a cooperative project conducted by the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC) Consortium. The MRLC Consortium is a partnership of Federal agencies (www.mrlc.gov), consisting of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). One of the primary goals of the project is to generate a current, consistent, seamless, and accurate National Land Cover Database (NLCD) circa 2001 for the United States at medium spatial resolution. For a detailed definition and discussion on MRLC and the NLCD 2001 products, refer to Homer and others (2004) and http://www.mrlc.gov/mrlc2k.asp.. The NLCD 2001 was created by partitioning the United States into mapping-zones. A total of 68 mapping-zones browse graphic: nlcd01-mappingzones.jpg were delineated within the conterminous United States based on ecoregion and geographical characteristics, edge-matching features, and the size requirement of Landsat mosaics. Mapping-zones encompass the whole or parts of several states. Questions about the NLCD mapping zones can be directed to the NLCD 2001 Land Cover Mapping Team at the USGS/EROS, Sioux Falls, SD (605) 594-6151 or mrlc@usgs.gov.

Data Series↗

National Land Cover Database 2001 (NLCD01) Imperviousness Layer Tile 2, northeast United States: IMPV01_2

This 30-meter resolution data set represents the imperviousness layer for the conterminous United States for the 2001 time period. The data have been arranged into four tiles to facilitate timely display and manipulation within a Geographic Information System, browse graphic: nlcd01-partition. The National Land Cover Data Set for 2001 was produced through a cooperative project conducted by the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC) Consortium. The MRLC Consortium is a partnership of Federal agencies (www.mrlc.gov), consisting of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). One of the primary goals of the project is to generate a current, consistent, seamless, and accurate National Land Cover Database (NLCD) circa 2001 for the United States at medium spatial resolution. For a detailed definition and discussion on MRLC and the NLCD 2001 products, refer to Homer and others (2004) and http://www.mrlc.gov/mrlc2k.asp.. The NLCD 2001 was created by partitioning the United States into mapping-zones. A total of 68 mapping-zones browse graphic: nlcd01-mappingzones.jpg were delineated within the conterminous United States based on ecoregion and geographical characteristics, edge-matching features, and the size requirement of Landsat mosaics. Mapping-zones encompass the whole or parts of several states. Questions about the NLCD mapping zones can be directed to the NLCD 2001 Land Cover Mapping Team at the USGS/EROS, Sioux Falls, SD (605) 594-6151 or mrlc@usgs.gov.

northeast United States↗

National Land Cover Database 2001 (NLCD01) Imperviousness Layer Tile 3, Southwest United States: IMPV01_3

This 30-meter resolution data set represents the imperviousness layer for the conterminous United States for the 2001 time period. The data have been arranged into four tiles to facilitate timely display and manipulation within a Geographic Information System, browse graphic: nlcd01-partition. The National Land Cover Data Set for 2001 was produced through a cooperative project conducted by the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC) Consortium. The MRLC Consortium is a partnership of Federal agencies (www.mrlc.gov), consisting of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). One of the primary goals of the project is to generate a current, consistent, seamless, and accurate National Land Cover Database (NLCD) circa 2001 for the United States at medium spatial resolution. For a detailed definition and discussion on MRLC and the NLCD 2001 products, refer to Homer and others (2004) and http://www.mrlc.gov/mrlc2k.asp.. The NLCD 2001 was created by partitioning the United States into mapping-zones. A total of 68 mapping-zones browse graphic: nlcd01-mappingzones.jpg were delineated within the conterminous United States based on ecoregion and geographical characteristics, edge-matching features, and the size requirement of Landsat mosaics. Mapping-zones encompass the whole or parts of several states. Questions about the NLCD mapping zones can be directed to the NLCD 2001 Land Cover Mapping Team at the USGS/EROS, Sioux Falls, SD (605) 594-6151 or mrlc@usgs.gov.

Data Series↗

National Land Cover Database 2001 (NLCD01) Imperviousness Layer Tile 4, Southeast United States: IMPV01_4

This 30-meter resolution data set represents the imperviousness layer for the conterminous United States for the 2001 time period. The data have been arranged into four tiles to facilitate timely display and manipulation within a Geographic Information System, browse graphic: nlcd01-partition. The National Land Cover Data Set for 2001 was produced through a cooperative project conducted by the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC) Consortium. The MRLC Consortium is a partnership of Federal agencies (www.mrlc.gov), consisting of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). One of the primary goals of the project is to generate a current, consistent, seamless, and accurate National Land Cover Database (NLCD) circa 2001 for the United States at medium spatial resolution. For a detailed definition and discussion on MRLC and the NLCD 2001 products, refer to Homer and others (2004) and http://www.mrlc.gov/mrlc2k.asp.. The NLCD 2001 was created by partitioning the United States into mapping-zones. A total of 68 mapping-zones browse graphic: nlcd01-mappingzones.jpg were delineated within the conterminous United States based on ecoregion and geographical characteristics, edge-matching features, and the size requirement of Landsat mosaics. Mapping-zones encompass the whole or parts of several states. Questions about the NLCD mapping zones can be directed to the NLCD 2001 Land Cover Mapping Team at the USGS/EROS, Sioux Falls, SD (605) 594-6151 or mrlc@usgs.gov.

Data Series↗

Hydrologic and water-quality data, Honey Creek State Natural Area, Comal County, Texas, August 2001-September 2003

The U.S. Geological Survey collected rainfall, streamflow, evapotranspiration, and rainfall and stormflow water-quality data from seven sites in two adjacent watersheds in the Honey Creek State Natural Area, Comal County, Texas, during August 2001–September 2003, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, and the San Antonio Water System. Data collected during this period represent baseline hydrologic and water-quality conditions before proposed removal of ashe juniper ( Juniperus ashei ) from one of the two watersheds. Juniper removal is intended as a best-management practice to increase water quantity (aquifer recharge and streamflow) and to protect water quality. Continuous (5-minute interval) rainfall data are collected at four sites; continuous (5-minute interval) streamflow data are collected at three sites. Fifteen-minute averages of meteorological and solar-energy-related data recorded at two sites are used to compute moving 30-minute evapotranspiration values on the basis of the energy-balance Bowen ratio method. Periodic rainfall water-quality data are collected at one site and stormflow water-quality data at three sites. Daily rainfall, streamflow, and evapotranspiration totals are presented in tables; detailed data are listed in an appendix. Results of analyses of the periodic rainfall and stormflow water-quality samples collected during runoff events are summarized in the appendix; not all data types were collected at all sites nor were all data types collected during the entire 26-month period.

Texas↗

A demonstration of the instream flow incremental methodology, Shenandoah River, Virginia

Current and projected demands on the water resources of the Shenandoah River have increased concerns for the potential effect of these demands on the natural integrity of the Shenandoah River system. The Instream Flow Incremental Method (IFIM) process attempts to integrate concepts of water-supply planning, analytical hydraulic engineering models, and empirically derived habitat versus flow functions to address water-use and instream-flow issues and questions concerning life-stage specific effects on selected species and the general well being of aquatic biological populations. The demonstration project also sets the stage for the identification and compilation of the major instream-flow issues in the Shenandoah River Basin, development of the required multidisciplinary technical team to conduct more detailed studies, and development of basin specific habitat and flow requirements for fish species, species assemblages, and various water uses in the Shenandoah River Basin. This report presents the results of an IFIM demonstration project, conducted on the main stem Shenandoah River in Virginia, during 1996 and 1997, using the Physical Habitat Simulation System (PHABSIM) model. Output from PHABSIM is used to address the general flow requirements for water supply and recreation and habitat for selected life stages of several fish species. The model output is only a small part of the information necessary for effective decision making and management of river resources. The information by itself is usually insufficient for formulation of recommendations regarding instream-flow requirements. Additional information, for example, can be obtained by analysis of habitat time-series data, habitat duration data, and habitat bottlenecks. Alternative-flow analysis and habitat-duration curves are presented.

Virginia↗

Development of the Coastal Storm Modeling System (CoSMoS) for predicting the impact of storms on high-energy, active-margin coasts

The Coastal Storm Modeling System (CoSMoS) applies a predominantly deterministic framework to make detailed predictions (meter scale) of storm-induced coastal flooding, erosion, and cliff failures over large geographic scales (100s of kilometers). CoSMoS was developed for hindcast studies, operational applications (i.e., nowcasts and multiday forecasts), and future climate scenarios (i.e., sea-level rise + storms) to provide emergency responders and coastal planners with critical storm hazards information that may be used to increase public safety, mitigate physical damages, and more effectively manage and allocate resources within complex coastal settings. The prototype system, developed for the California coast, uses the global WAVEWATCH III wave model, the TOPEX/Poseidon satellite altimetry-based global tide model, and atmospheric-forcing data from either the US National Weather Service (operational mode) or Global Climate Models (future climate mode), to determine regional wave and water-level boundary conditions. These physical processes are dynamically downscaled using a series of nested Delft3D-WAVE (SWAN) and Delft3D-FLOW (FLOW) models and linked at the coast to tightly spaced XBeach (eXtreme Beach) cross-shore profile models and a Bayesian probabilistic cliff failure model. Hindcast testing demonstrates that, despite uncertainties in preexisting beach morphology over the ~500 km alongshore extent of the pilot study area, CoSMoS effectively identifies discrete sections of the coast (100s of meters) that are vulnerable to coastal hazards under a range of current and future oceanographic forcing conditions, and is therefore an effective tool for operational and future climate scenario planning.

Natural Hazards↗

Map showing outcrop of the coal-bearing units and land use in the Gulf Coast region

This map is a preliminary compilation of the outcrop geology of the known coal-bearing units in the Gulf Coast Coal region. The map has been compiled for use in the National Coal Resource Assessment Project currently being conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey, and will be updated as the assessment progresses. The purpose of the map is to show the distribution of coal-bearing rocks in the Gulf Coastal Plain Region and to show stratigraphic correlations, transportation network, fossil-fuel burning power plants, and federally managed lands in the region. It is hoped that this map may aid coal exploration and development in the region. Geologic contacts were digitized from paper copies of the maps listed in the reference section below. The primary source of information was the 1:500,000-scale state geology map series, but larger scale maps were use to better define certain areas, notably the Jackson-Claiborne contact in western Kentucky and Tennessee for example (Olive, 1980). Contacts along state boundaries were modified to best-fit information available from the border areas. Note that coal distribution in the mapped units is not uniform. For example, the Jackson Group contains coal in Texas, but in Mississippi is not presently known to contain significant coal deposits. The unit is widespread and in part non-marine and thus of potential future interest. In contrast, the Jackson Group is not shown in Georgia where it is mostly marine and residuum (weathered material) at the surface. Tertiary age coal has also been noted in the Vicksburg Group (Oligocene) of Louisiana and Mississippi, but is not shown on this map. Contacts with mapped surficial units are not always shown. The locations of coal mine permit boundaries are based on information available at the time of publication and were obtained from the Division of Surface Mining and Reclamation, Railroad Commission of Texas, Austin, and the Injection and Mining Division, Department of Natural Resources, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. The correlation of map units and formation names generally follow Galloway and others (1991). We have placed the Paleocene-Eocene boundary in the middle of the Calvert Bluff Formation in Texas based on unpublished pollen biostratigraphy reports (N.O. Fredericksen, unpublished data, 1993; D.J. Nichols, unpublished data, 1996).

Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Florida, Kansas, Kentu↗

Great Lakes prey fish populations: a cross-basin overview of status and trends based on bottom trawl surveys, 1978-2013

The assessment of Great Lakes prey fish stocks have been conducted annually with bottom trawls since the 1970s by the Great Lakes Science Center, sometimes assisted by partner agencies. These stock assessments provide data on the status and trends of prey fish that are consumed by important commercial and recreational fishes. Although all these annual surveys are conducted using bottom trawls, they differ among the lakes in the proportion of the lake covered, seasonal timing, trawl gear used, and the manner in which the trawl is towed (across or along bottom contours). Because each assessment is unique, population indices were standardized to the highest value for a time series within each lake for the following prey species: Cisco (Coregonus artedi), Bloater (C. hoyi), Rainbow Smelt (Osmerus mordax), Alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus), and Round Goby (Neogobius melanostomus). In this report, standardized indices are presented in graphical form along with synopses to provide a short, informal cross-basin summary of the status and trends of principal prey fishes. There was basin-wide agreement in the trends of age-1 and older biomass for all prey species, with the highest concordance occurring for coregonids and Rainbow Smelt, and weaker concordance for Alewife. For coregonids, the highest biomass occurred from the mid-1980s to the mid-1990s. Rainbow Smelt biomass declined slowly and erratically during the last quarter century. Alewife biomass was generally higher from the early 1980s through 1990s across the Great Lakes, but since the early 1990s, trends have been divergent across the lakes, though there has been a downward trend in all lakes since 2005. Recently, Lake Huron has shown resurgence in biomass of Bloater, achieving 75% of its maximum record in 2012 due to recruitment of a succession of strong and moderate year classes that appeared in 2005-2011. Also, strong recruitment of the 2010 year class of Alewife has led to a sharp increase in biomass of Alewife in Lake Michigan. In general, trends in year-class strengths were less concordant across the basin and only coregonids showed statistical agreement across the upper Great Lakes. The appearance of strong and moderate year-classes of Bloater in Lake Huron in 2005- 2011 countered the trend of continuing weak year-classes of coregonids in Lakes Michigan and Superior. Not shown in our analysis is the appearance of the 2013 year-class of Bloater in Huron, the largest to date. There was no agreement in cross-basin trends in year-class strengths for Rainbow Smelt and Alewife, although there was agreement between pairs of lakes. Although there was statistical agreement in trends of age-0 and older Round Goby biomass among lakes where this species has successfully invaded (Michigan, Huron, Erie and Ontario), temporal patterns of biomass in each lake were different. Round Goby may be approaching equilibrium in Lake Erie, peaking in Lake Huron, and expanding in Lake Michigan. The trend in Lake Ontario remains unclear. Declining abundance in Lake Erie has corresponded with evidence that Round Goby have become increasingly incorporated into piscivore diets, e.g., Lake Trout, Walleye, Smallmouth Bass, Yellow Perch, and Burbot in Lakes Michigan, Huron, Erie, and Ontario. Round Goby continue to be absent from spring bottom trawl assessments in Lake Superior, but their presence in the harbors and embayments of Duluth and Thunder Bay (U.S. Geological Survey and Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, unpublished data), suggests that there is potential for future colonization.

Great Lakes↗

Topographic and hydrographic survey data for the São Francisco River near Torrinha, Bahia, Brazil, 2014

Navigable inland waterways, including lakes, rivers, and reservoirs, are important transportation routes for people and goods in Brazil. Natural and anthropogenic effects coupled with recent severe droughts have led to decreased inland waterway navigation. The Company for Development of the São Francisco and Parnaíba River Valleys (CODEVASF) has recognized the decrease in waterway navigation and is investing resources to help restore selected reaches of the São Francisco River for navigation. In 2011, CODEVASF signed an agreement with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) seeking technical assistance and engineering expertise in waterway navigation and bank stabilization. The Torrinha-Itacoatiara study reach near Torrinha, Bahia was 1 of 12 conceptual waterway navigation improvement feasibility studies and was the focus of this study. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the USACE and CODEVASF, collected topographic and hydrographic data from May 22 to June 12, 2014, to provide baseline data for supporting computational streamflow models. This report presents the surveying techniques and data-processing methods used to collect, process, and disseminate topographic and hydrographic data. All standard and non‑standard data-collection methods, techniques, and data process methods were documented. Additional discussion describes the quality-assurance and quality-control elements used in this study, along with the limitations for the Torrinha-Itacoatiara study reach data. The topographic and hydrographic geospatial data are published along with associated metadata.

Bahia↗

A seabird monitoring program for the North Pacific

Seabird monitoring is the accumulation of time series data on any aspect of seabird distribution, abundance, demography, or behavior. Typical studies include annual or less frequent measures of numbers or productivity; less commonly, the focus is on marine habitat use, phenology, food habits, or survival. The key requirement is that observations are replicated over time and made with sufficient precision and accuracy to permit the meaningful analysis of variability and trends. Along the Pacific coast of North America, seabird monitoring has consumed substantial amounts of public funding since the early 1970s. The effort has been largely uncoordinated among the many entities involved, including provincial, state, and federal agencies, some private organizations, university faculty, and students. We reaffirm the rationale for monitoring seabirds, review briefly the nature and accomplishments of the existing effort, and suggest actions needed to improve the effectiveness of seabird monitoring in the Pacific. In particular, we propose and describe a comprehensive Seabird Monitoring Database designed specifically to work with observations on seabird population parameters that are replicated over time.

Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Na↗

Evaluation of the effects of precipitation on ground-water levels from wells in selected alluvial aquifers in Utah and Arizona, 1936-2005

Increased withdrawals from alluvial aquifers of the southwestern United States during the last half-century have intensified the effects of drought on ground-water levels in valleys where withdrawal for irrigation is greatest. Furthermore, during wet periods, reduced withdrawals coupled with increased natural recharge cause rising ground-water levels. In order to manage water resources more effectively, analysis of ground-water levels under the influence of natural and anthropogenic stresses is useful. This report evaluates the effects of precipitation patterns on ground-water levels in areas of Utah and Arizona that have experienced different amounts of ground-water withdrawal. This includes a comparison of water-level records from basins that are hydrogeologically and climatologically similar but have contrasting levels of ground-water development. Hydrologic data, including records of ground-water levels, basin-wide annual ground-water withdrawals, and precipitation were examined from two basins in Utah (Milford and central Sevier) and three in Arizona (Aravaipa Canyon, Willcox, and Douglas). Most water-level records examined in this study from basins experiencing substantial ground-water development (Milford, Douglas, and Willcox) showed strong trends of declining water levels. Other water-level records, generally from the less-developed basins (central Sevier and Aravaipa Canyon) exhibited trends of increasing water levels. These trends are likely the result of accumulating infiltration of unconsumed irrigation water. Water-level records that had significant trends were detrended by subtraction of a low-order polynomial in an attempt to eliminate the variation in the water-level records that resulted from ground-water withdrawal or the application of water for irrigation. After detrending, water-level residuals were correlated with 2- to 10-year moving averages of annual precipitation from representative stations for the individual basins. The water-level residual time series for each well was matched with the 2- to 10-year moving average of annual precipitation with which it was best correlated and the results were compared across basins and hydrologic settings. Analysis of water-level residuals and moving averages of annual precipitation indicate that ground-water levels in the Utah basins respond more slowly to precipitation patterns than those from the Arizona basins. This is attributed to the dominant mechanism of recharge that most directly influences the respective valley aquifers. Substantial recharge in the Utah basins likely originates as infiltrating snowmelt in the mountain block far from the valley aquifer, whereas mountain-front recharge and streambed infiltration of runoff are the dominant recharge mechanisms operating in the Arizona basins. It was determined that the fraction of water-level variation caused by local precipitation patterns becomes more difficult to resolve with increasing effects of ground-water pumping, especially from incomplete records. As the demand for ground water increases in the southwestern United States, long-term records of ground-water levels have the potential to provide valuable information about the precipitation-driven variation in water levels, which has implications to water management related to water availability.

Arizona, Utah↗