Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Community Science”

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 433 records · Page 24Linked to original sources
USGS2011

From ridge to reef—linking erosion and changing watersheds to impacts on the coral reef ecosystems of Hawai‘i and the Pacific Ocean

Coral reef ecosystems are threatened by unprecedented watershed changes in the United States and worldwide. These ecosystems sustain fishing and tourism industries essential to the economic survival of many communities. Sediment, nutrients, and pollutants from watersheds are increasingly transported to coastal waters, where these contaminants damage corals. Although pollution from watersheds is one of many factors threatening coral survival, it is one that local people can have a profound influence on. U.S. Geological Survey scientists are using mapping, monitoring, and computer modeling to better forecast the effects of watershed changes on reef health. Working with communities in Hawai‘i and on other U.S. islands in the Pacific, they are helping to provide the science needed to make informed decisions on watershed and coral reef management.

Hawai'i↗
USGS2014

Strategic needs of water on the Yukon: An interdisciplinary approach to studying hydrology and climate change in the Lower Yukon River Basin

Strategic Needs of Water on the Yukon (SNOWY) is an interdisciplinary research project funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF; http://www.nsf.gov/ ). The SNOWY team is made up of a diverse group of researchers from different backgrounds and organizations. This partnership between scientists from different disciplines (hydrology, geography, and social science), government agencies, nonprofit organizations, universities, and Lower Yukon River Basin (LYRB) and Yukon-Kuskokwim (YK) Delta communities provided an opportunity to study the effects of climate change using a holistic approach. The Arctic and Subarctic are experiencing environmental change at a rate faster than the rest of the world, and the lack of historical baseline data in these often remote locations makes understanding and predicting regional climate change difficult. This project focused on collecting data to fill in these gaps by using both quantitative and qualitative methodologies to tell the story of environmental change in this region as told by the physical data and the people who rely on this landscape.

Alaska↗
USGS2014

Flood-inundation maps for the Mississinewa River at Marion, Indiana, 2013

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 9-mile (mi) reach of the Mississinewa River from 0.75 mi upstream from the Pennsylvania Street bridge in Marion, Indiana, to 0.2 mi downstream from State Route 15 were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the Indiana Office of Community and Rural Affairs. The flood inundation maps, which can be accessed through the USGS Flood Inundation Mapping Science Web site at http://water.usgs.gov/osw/flood_inundation, depict estimates of the areal extent and depth of flooding corresponding to selected water levels (stages) at the USGS streamgage on the Mississinewa River at Marion (station number 03326500). Near-real-time stages at this streamgage may be obtained on the Internet from the USGS National Water Information System at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/ or the National Weather Service (NWS) Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service at http://water.weather.gov/ahps/, which also forecasts flood hydrographs at this site. Flood profiles were computed for the stream reach by means of a one-dimensional step-backwater model. The model was calibrated by using the current stage-discharge relation at the Mississinewa River streamgage, in combination with water-surface profiles from historic floods and from the current (2002) flood-insurance study for Grant County, Indiana. The hydraulic model was then used to compute seven water-surface profiles for flood stages at 1-fo (ft) intervals referenced to the streamgage datum and ranging from 10 ft, which is near bankfull, to 16 ft, which is between the water levels associated with the estimated 10- and 2-percent annual exceedance probability floods (floods with recurrence interval between 10 and 50 years) and equals the “major flood stage” as defined by the NWS. The simulated water-surface profiles were then combined with a Geographic Information System digital elevation model (derived from light detection and ranging (lidar) data having a 0.98 ft vertical accuracy and 4.9 ft horizontal resolution) to delineate the area flooded at each water level. The availability of these maps, along with Internet information regarding current stage from the USGS streamgage and forecasted high-flow stages from the NWS, will provide emergency management personnel and residents with information that is critical for flood response activities such as evacuations and road closures, as well as for post-flood recovery efforts.

Indiana↗
USGS2022

Methods for evaluating Gap Analysis Project habitat distribution maps with species occurrence data

The National Gap Analysis Project created species habitat distribution models for all terrestrial vertebrates in the United States to support conservation assessments and explore patterns of species richness. Those models link species to specific habitats throughout the range of each species. For most vertebrates, there are not enough occurrence data to drive inductive, range-wide species habitat distribution models at high spatial and thematic resolution. However, it is possible to use occurrence data for model evaluation. The combination of citizen science, formal species survey work, and digitized specimen archives are making millions of observations available to the scientific community. Our challenge is to combine the mostly unstructured data into metrics that help us characterize and understand patterns of biodiversity. In this work, we propose two model-evaluation metrics. The first, a buffer proportion assessment, is based on the proportion of habitat in the range relative to the mean proportion of habitat around each of the species’ occurrence records. The second is a measure of the sensitivity (proportion of true presence) to buffer distances around occurrence records. The buffer proportion is a modification of model prevalence versus point prevalence metric, whereby comparison to a null model allows us to determine if the model performs better or worse than random. In this report, we describe the workflow used to compile and filter the species occurrence records from online resources (for example, the Global Biodiversity Information Facility) and show results for a single species, Desmognathus quadramaculatus (black-bellied salamander). For the salamander, 222 occurrence points met our criteria for inclusion in the evaluation. We found the model performed better than random with a buffer proportion index of 1.745, indicating about 5 times as much habitat was found adjacent to known occurrence records than would be expected from randomly located sites throughout the range. Sensitivity increased with larger buffer distances and leveled off to around 0.7 between 1,000- and 2,000-meter buffer distances, indicating the model is likely best suited for scales exceeding 1,000 meters. We plan to report the buffer proportion assessment and sensitivity metrics along with the full species model reports to increase understanding of the model’s performance and to use the metrics to help prioritize revisions to the models.

Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Virgi↗
USGS2023

Pacific coastal and marine science of the U.S. Geological Survey in Santa Cruz, California

Introduction The Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center is one of three U.S. Geological Survey science centers that serve the mission of the Coastal and Marine Hazards and Resources Program, the primary Federal marine geology and physical science research program focused on the Nation’s coastal and marine landscape. Our portfolio of coastal and marine projects in the Pacific Ocean provides the scientific information necessary to sustainably manage coastal and marine resources, to prepare for natural hazard events such as landslides and tsunamis, and to build resilience in coastal communities vulnerable to the effects of climate change, as well as storms, flooding, and risks to groundwater resources. The Nation’s demand for societally relevant coastal and marine science has never been greater, and we invite you to explore some of our ongoing Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center activities in these pages.

General Information Product↗
USGS2025

Centering voices of scientists from marginalized backgrounds to understand experiences in climate adaptation science and inform action

Identifying and building solutions to help people and ecosystems adapt to climate change requires participation of all people; however, Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) fields, including environmental sciences, continue to lack diversity. To address this issue, many institutions have increased programming to recruit and retain people from historically marginalized backgrounds in STEM fields. Institutions use surveys to evaluate the experiences of community members and identify areas for improvement; however, surveys often summarize and reflect majority perspectives and disregard voices of historically marginalized individuals. In June 2021, a survey of graduate students, postdocs, faculty, staff, and researchers affiliated with the Northeast Climate Adaptation Science Center (NE CASC) evaluated their experiences of diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice (DEIJ) using Likert-based and long-answer questions. We analyzed the results as a whole, but also focused on the responses of people who self-identified as members of a marginalized group (“marginalized respondents”) in climate adaptation science to center their voices. Marginalized respondents reported being motivated to enter climate adaptation science to improve society and the environment rather than for intellectual curiosity, which motivated one third of non-marginalized respondents. Once in science, marginalized respondents reported feeling less supported and comfortable at work and were more likely to have considered leaving science and academia in the last year. Long-answer responses of marginalized respondents indicated distrust in the ability of leadership and existing DEIJ initiatives to effectively tackle systemic issues and emphasized the importance of focusing on equity and inclusion before recruitment. Marginalized respondents identified additional funding to support existing DEIJ efforts and undergraduates as priorities. By allowing participants to self-identify as part of a marginalized group, we were able to highlight experiences and needs without risking exposure based on race, gender, disability status, or sexual orientation. This approach can be applied to other small organizations with limited demographic diversity.

PLoS ONE↗
USGS2023

U.S. Geological Survey Rocky Mountain Region 2022 science exchange, showcasing interdisciplinary and state-of-the-art USGS science

Introduction The Rocky Mountains and the Colorado River Basin in the Western United States represent complex, interconnected systems that sustain a number of species, including tens of millions of humans. These systems face several challenges, including worsening drought, altered wildfire regimes, climate change, and the spread of invasive species. These factors can exacerbate one another, further contributing to habitat loss and affecting species of conservation concern. Characterizing and managing these challenges require interdisciplinary communities of scientists to develop information and decision-support tools that can inform holistic land and water management solutions. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Rocky Mountain Region 2022 Science Exchange focused on the use of interdisciplinary and state-of-the-art science being conducted by USGS scientists in the region to address these complex problems. The USGS Rocky Mountain Regional Office organized its first Science Exchange in 2017 to share scientific information between leaders and early career scientists throughout the region. Science Exchanges held in 2018 and 2020 focused on drought science relevant to the region and the Earth Monitoring, Analyses, and Prediction (EarthMAP) concept, which is designed to facilitate interdisciplinary, timely, and actionable science related to drought in the Colorado River Basin and other areas. Based on the emerging need for more holistic approaches to address increasingly complex natural resource issues that affect society, the Region hosted a virtual fourth Science Exchange for three days in April 2022. This event focused on barriers and bridges to interdisciplinary science and highlighted studies from the Region to inspire collaboration across disciplines. Presentations described recent and ongoing research that applied collaborative and state-of-the-art methods to address problems in the fields of geology, hydrology, ecology, and natural hazards. Science collaboration and outreach to all levels of stakeholders are vital elements needed for providing timely and actionable data, interpretations, analytical tools, and products. These presentations led to active online chats and panel discussions and showcased interdisciplinary science and advanced methods that may inform and lead to more effective, holistic management decisions as the Western United States adapts to ongoing and future changes.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2019

Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units program—2018 year in review

The Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units (CRU) program had an interesting and challenging year in 2018. We made significant strategic advances on many fronts and had setbacks in others. Our relationship with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the agency we belonged to from 1935 to the mid-1990s, was further reinforced through strategic efforts with the Service’s Science Applications senior staff. This is bearing fruit in terms of research collaborations and funding support. As part of a larger effort between the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Ecosystems Mission Area and the Service’s endangered species program, we are also collaborating to address science needs for species in pre-listing status. Barry Grand, Unit Supervisor (South), has been instrumental in this effort. Tom Edwards of the Utah Unit has met with representatives of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies to promote training of leaders and “hands dirty” biologists in species distribution modeling. The Association passed a unanimous resolution endorsing the training at their midyear meeting in March. Tom held a workshop at the annual meeting of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies in September, and future workshops, supported by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, will be held bringing State agency and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologists together to work on species of common concern. Wyoming Unit Leader Matt Kauffman’s pioneering work in identifying and mapping big-game migration corridors has captured the attention of conservationists far and wide. In the spring, the Secretary of the Interior signed Secretarial Order No. 3362, "Improving Habitat Quality in Western Big-Game Winter Range and Migration Corridors" directing efforts of several U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) bureaus to collaborate with States in identifying and protecting big-game corridors in 11 States. Matt has conducted several workshops that directly support the Secretarial order, and more are planned. Corridor mapping efforts supported by the USGS and the DOI, based in the States and coordinated by Matt, are unfolding. Unit Administrative Officer Shana Coulby and her staff hosted a training program for university support staff at USGS National Headquarters in March. Shana’s team did a superb job, and the camaraderie among all was evident. We co-sponsored the third in a series of workshops at the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference in March on bridging the gap between science and management. The State Department requested that we coordinate a workshop that would bring CRU scientists and other U.S. representatives together with Brazilian, Colombian, and Peruvian scientists and decision makers to develop best practices to minimize environmental damage from infrastructure development in the Amazon and to collaborate on science needs. The workshop was held in Iquitos, Peru, in the heart of the Amazon during August. Our cooperator community, represented by the National Cooperators Coalition, was very active in response to the President’s budget proposal that would have redirected funding for the CRU program to other priorities. Their efforts are reflected in the House and Senate marks on the fiscal year 2019 budget that not only restored funding, but recommended increases. You will see in this report many other accomplishments of our individual scientists and students during 2018. It was an impressive and productive year! What you won’t see chronicled is the work of the CRU headquarters staff and University support staff. These folks are extraordinary in their dedication to working with cooperators and scientists to solve problems and ensure the important work gets accomplished with minimal interference. We are truly fortunate to have such skilled and dedicated folks in the trenches. I was fortunate to visit several units during 2018. For me, this is the most enriching part of my duties. I get to see firsthand the work our scientists do, the incredible students being mentored, and meet our cooperators on their turf. As we look forward towards the horizon, 2019 looks brighter for the CRU program. Efforts by our cooperators to generate support for filling our vacancies are materializing. Our cadre of scientists is second to none, and the breadth and depth of our work are nothing short of impressive. Thanks to all who are part of this cooperative endeavor—conservation is the ultimate winner in our efforts!

Circular↗
USGS2015

Flood-inundation maps for the White River at Indianapolis, Indiana, 2014

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 6.4-mile reach of the White River in Indianapolis, Indiana, from 0.3 miles upstream of Michigan Street to the Harding Street Generating Station dam (at the confluence with Lick Creek), were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the Indiana Office of Community and Rural Affairs. The flood-inundation maps, which can be accessed through the USGS Flood Inundation Mapping Science Web site at http://water.usgs.gov/osw/flood_inundation/ , depict estimates of the areal extent and depth of flooding corresponding to selected water levels (stages) at the USGS streamgage on the White River at Indianapolis, Ind. (station number 03353000). Near-real-time stages at this streamgage may be obtained on the Internet from the USGS National Water Information System at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/ or the National Weather Service (NWS) Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service at http://water.weather.gov/ahps/ , which also forecasts flood hydrographs at this site. Flood profiles were computed for the stream reach by means of a one-dimensional step-backwater model. The model was calibrated by using the current stage-discharge relations at three USGS streamgages: the White River at Indianapolis (station number 03353000), the White River at Michigan Street at Indianapolis (station number 03352953), and the White River at Stout Generating Station at Indianapolis (station number 03353611). The hydraulic model was then used to compute 11 water-surface profiles for flood stages at 1-foot (ft) intervals referenced to the White River at Indianapolis streamgage datum and ranging from 10 ft, or the NWS “action stage,” to 20 ft, which is the highest stage in the stage-discharge relation for the streamgage and the NWS “moderate flood stage.” The simulated water-surface profiles were then combined with a geographic information system digital elevation model (derived from light detection and ranging [lidar] data having a vertical 0.183-ft root mean squared error and 5.0-ft horizontal resolution) to delineate the area flooded at each water level. The availability of these maps, along with Internet information regarding current stage from the USGS streamgage and forecasted high-flow stages from the NWS, will provide emergency management personnel and residents with information that is critical for flood response activities such as evacuations and road closures, as well as for postflood recovery efforts.

Indiana↗
USGS2015

Flood-inundation maps for the Tippecanoe River at Winamac, Indiana

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 6.2 mile reach of the Tippecanoe River at Winamac, Indiana (Ind.), were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the Indiana Office of Community and Rural Affairs. The flood-inundation maps, which can be accessed through the USGS Flood Inundation Mapping Science Web site at http://water.usgs.gov/osw/flood_inundation/ , depict estimates of the areal extent and depth of flooding corresponding to selected water levels (stages) at the USGS streamgage 03331753, Tippecanoe River at Winamac, Ind. Current conditions for estimating near-real-time areas of inundation using USGS streamgage information may be obtained on the Internet from the USGS National Water Information System at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/in/nwis/uv?site_no=03331753 . In addition, information has been provided by the USGS to the National Weather Service (NWS) for incorporation into their Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service (AHPS) flood warning system ( http://water.weather.gov/ahps/ ). The NWS AHPS forecasts flood hydrographs at many sites that are often collocated with USGS streamgages, including the Tippecanoe River at Winamac, Ind. NWS AHPS forecast peak-stage information may be used in conjunction with the maps developed in this study to show predicted areas of flood inundation and forecasts of flood hydrographs at this site. For this study, flood profiles were computed for the Tippecanoe River reach by means of a one-dimensional step-backwater model. The hydraulic model was calibrated by using the most current stage-discharge relations at the Tippecanoe River streamgage, in combination with the current (2014) Federal Emergency Management Agency flood-insurance study for Pulaski County. The calibrated hydraulic model was then used to determine nine water-surface profiles for flood stages at 1-foot intervals referenced to the streamgage datum and ranging from bankfull to the highest stage of the current stage-discharge rating curve. The 1-percent annual exceedance probability (AEP) flood stage (flood with recurrence intervals within 100 years) has not been determined yet for this streamgage location. The rating has not been developed for the 1-percent AEP because the streamgage dates to only 2001. The simulated water-surface profiles were then used with a geographic information system (GIS) digital elevation model (DEM, derived from Light Detection and Ranging [lidar]) in order to delineate the area flooded at each water level. The availability of these maps, along with Internet information regarding current stage from the USGS streamgage 03331753, Tippecanoe River at Winamac, Ind., and forecast stream stages from the NWS AHPS, provides emergency management personnel and residents with information that is critical for flood response activities such as evacuations and road closures, as well as for post-flood recovery efforts.

Indiana↗
USGS2016

Flood-inundation maps for the East Fork White River at Shoals, Indiana

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 5.9-mile reach of the East Fork White River at Shoals, Indiana (Ind.), were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the Indiana Office of Community and Rural Affairs. The flood-inundation maps, which can be accessed through the USGS Flood Inundation Mapping Science Web site at http://water.usgs.gov/osw/flood_inundation/ depict estimates of the areal extent and depth of flooding corresponding to selected water levels (stages) at the USGS streamgage on the East Fork White River at Shoals, Ind. (USGS station number 03373500). Near-real-time stages at this streamgage may be obtained on the Internet from the USGS National Water Information System at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/ or the National Weather Service (NWS) Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service (AHPS) at http://water.weather.gov/ahps/ , which also forecasts flood hydrographs at this site (NWS AHPS site SHLI3). NWS AHPS forecast peak stage information may be used in conjunction with the maps developed in this study to show predicted areas of flood inundation. Flood profiles were computed for the East Fork White River reach by means of a one-dimensional, step-backwater model developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The hydraulic model was calibrated by using the current stage-discharge relation (USGS rating no. 43.0) at USGS streamgage 03373500, East Fork White River at Shoals, Ind. The calibrated hydraulic model was then used to compute 26 water-surface profiles for flood stages at 1-foot (ft) intervals referenced to the streamgage datum and ranging from approximately bankfull (10 ft) to the highest stage of the current stage-discharge rating curve (35 ft). The simulated water-surface profiles were then combined with a geographic information system (GIS) digital elevation model (DEM), derived from light detection and ranging (lidar) data, to delineate the area flooded at each water level. The areal extent of the 24-ft flood-inundation map was verified with photographs from a flood event on July 20, 2015. The availability of these maps, along with information on the Internet regarding current stage from the USGS streamgage at East Fork White River at Shoals, Ind., and forecasted stream stages from the NWS AHPS, provides emergency management personnel and residents with information that is critical for flood response activities such as evacuations and road closures, as well as for post-flood recovery efforts.

Indiana↗
USGS2016

Flood-Inundation Maps for Sugar Creek at Crawfordsville, Indiana

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 6.5-mile reach of Sugar Creek at Crawfordsville, Indiana, were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the Indiana Office of Community and Rural Affairs. The flood-inundation maps, which can be accessed through the USGS Flood Inundation Mapping Science Web site at http://water.usgs.gov/osw/flood_inundation/ , depict estimates of the areal extent and depth of flooding corresponding to selected water levels (stages) at the USGS streamgage 03339500, Sugar Creek at Crawfordsville, Ind. Near-real-time stages at this streamgage may be obtained on the Internet from the USGS National Water Information System at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/ or the National Weather Service (NWS) Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service at http://water.weather.gov/ahps/ , which also forecasts flood hydrographs at this site (NWS site CRWI3). Flood profiles were computed for the USGS streamgage 03339500, Sugar Creek at Crawfordsville, Ind., reach by means of a one-dimensional step-backwater hydraulic modeling software developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The hydraulic model was calibrated using the current stage-discharge rating at the USGS streamgage 03339500, Sugar Creek at Crawfordsville, Ind., and high-water marks from the flood of April 19, 2013, which reached a stage of 15.3 feet. The hydraulic model was then used to compute 13 water-surface profiles for flood stages at 1-foot (ft) intervals referenced to the streamgage datum ranging from 4.0 ft (the NWS “action stage”) to 16.0 ft, which is the highest stage interval of the current USGS stage-discharge rating curve and 2 ft higher than the NWS “major flood stage.” The simulated water-surface profiles were then combined with a Geographic Information System digital elevation model (derived from light detection and ranging [lidar]) data having a 0.49-ft root mean squared error and 4.9-ft horizontal resolution) to delineate the area flooded at each stage. The availability of these maps, along with Internet information regarding current stage from the USGS streamgage and forecasted high-flow stages from the NWS, will provide emergency management personnel and residents with information that is critical for flood response activities such as evacuations and road closures, as well as for post-flood recovery efforts.

Indiana↗
USGS2016

Flood-inundation maps for the Yellow River at Plymouth, Indiana

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 4.9-mile reach of the Yellow River at Plymouth, Indiana (Ind.), were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the Indiana Office of Community and Rural Affairs. The flood-inundation maps, which can be accessed through the USGS Flood Inundation Mapping Science Web site at http://water.usgs.gov/osw/flood_inundation/ , depict estimates of the areal extent and depth of flooding corresponding to selected water levels (stages) at the USGS streamgage 05516500, Yellow River at Plymouth, Ind. Current conditions for estimating near-real-time areas of inundation using USGS streamgage information may be obtained on the Internet at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/in/nwis/uv?site_no=05516500 . In addition, information has been provided to the National Weather Service (NWS) for incorporation into their Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service (AHPS) flood-warning system ( http:/water.weather.gov/ahps/ ). The NWS AHPS forecasts flood hydrographs at many sites that are often collocated with USGS streamgages, including the Yellow River at Plymouth, Ind. NWS AHPS-forecast peak-stage information may be used in conjunction with the maps developed in this study to show predicted areas of flood and forecasts of flood hydrographs at this site. For this study, flood profiles were computed for the Yellow River reach by means of a one-dimensional step-backwater model. The hydraulic model was calibrated by using the current stage-discharge relations at the Yellow River streamgage, in combination with the flood-insurance study for Marshall County (issued in 2011). The calibrated hydraulic model was then used to determine eight water-surface profiles for flood stages at 1-foot intervals referenced to the streamgage datum and ranging from bankfull to the highest stage of the current stage-discharge rating curve. The 1-percent annual exceedance probability flood profile elevation (flood elevation with recurrence intervals within 100 years) is within the calibrated water-surface elevations for comparison. The simulated water-surface profiles were then used with a geographic information system (GIS) digital elevation model (DEM, derived from Light Detection and Ranging [lidar]) in order to delineate the area flooded at each water level. The availability of these maps, along with Internet information regarding current stage from the USGS streamgage 05516500, Yellow River at Plymouth, Ind., and forecast stream stages from the NWS AHPS, provides emergency management personnel and residents with information that is critical for flood response activities such as evacuations and road closures, as well as for postflood recovery efforts.

Indiana↗
USGS2016

Flood inundation maps for the Wabash River at New Harmony, Indiana

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 3.68-mile reach of the Wabash River extending 1.77 miles upstream and 1.91 miles downstream from streamgage 03378500 at New Harmony, Indiana, were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the Indiana Office of Community and Rural Affairs. The flood-inundation maps, which can be accessed through the USGS Flood Inundation Mapping Science Web site at http://water.usgs.gov/osw/flood_inundation/ , depict estimates of the areal extent and depth of flooding corresponding to selected water levels (stages) at the USGS streamgage at Wabash River at New Harmony, Ind. (station 03378500). Near-real-time stages at this streamgage may be obtained from the USGS National Water Information System at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/ or the National Weather Service (NWS) Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service at http://water.weather.gov/ahps/ , which also forecasts flood hydrographs at this site (NHRI3). Flood profiles were computed for the stream reach by means of a one-dimensional step-backwater model. The hydraulic model was calibrated by using the most current stage-discharge relations at the Wabash River at New Harmony, Ind., streamgage and the documented high-water marks from the flood of April 27–28, 2013. The calibrated hydraulic model was then used to compute 17 water-surface profiles for flood stages at approximately 1-foot intervals referenced to the streamgage datum and ranging from 10.0 feet, or near bankfull, to 25.4 feet, the highest stage of the stage-discharge rating curve used in the model. The simulated water-surface profiles were then combined with a geographic information system digital elevation model (derived from light detection and ranging (lidar) data having a 0.98-ft vertical accuracy and 4.9-ft horizontal resolution) to delineate the area flooded at each water level. The availability of these maps along with Internet information regarding current stage from the USGS streamgage at Wabash River at New Harmony, Ind., and forecasted stream stages from the NWS will provide emergency management personnel and residents with information that is critical for flood response activities such as evacuations and road closures, as well as for post-flood recovery efforts.

Indiana↗
USGS2017

Flood-inundation maps for the St. Joseph River at Elkhart, Indiana

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 6.6-mile reach of the St. Joseph River at Elkhart, Indiana, were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the Indiana Office of Community and Rural Affairs. The flood-inundation maps, which can be accessed through the USGS Flood Inundation Mapping Science Web site at https://water.usgs.gov/osw/flood_inundation/ , depict estimates of the areal extent and depth of flooding corresponding to selected water levels (stages) at the USGS streamgage 04101000, St. Joseph River at Elkhart, Ind. Real-time stages at this streamgage may be obtained on the Internet from the USGS National Water Information System at https://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis or the National Weather Service (NWS) Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service at http:/water.weather.gov/ahps/ , which also forecasts flood hydrographs at this site (NWS site EKMI3). Flood profiles were computed for the stream reach by means of a one-dimensional, step-backwater hydraulic modeling software developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The hydraulic model was calibrated using the current stage-discharge rating at the USGS streamgage 04101000, St. Joseph River at Elkhart, Ind., and the documented high-water marks from the flood of March 1982. The hydraulic model was then used to compute six water-surface profiles for flood stages at 1-foot (ft) intervals referenced to the streamgage datum ranging from 23.0 ft (the NWS “action stage”) to 28.0 ft, which is the highest stage interval of the current USGS stage-discharge rating curve and 1 ft higher than the NWS “major flood stage.” The simulated water-surface profiles were then combined with a Geographic Information System digital elevation model (derived from light detection and ranging [lidar] data having a 0.49-ft root mean squared error and 4.9-ft horizontal resolution, resampled to a 10-ft grid) to delineate the area flooded at each stage. The availability of these maps, along with Internet information regarding current stage from the USGS streamgage and forecasted high-flow stages from the NWS, will provide emergency management personnel and residents with information that is critical for flood response activities such as evacuations and road closures, as well as for post-flood recovery efforts.

Indiana↗
USGS2023

The RACE for freshwater biodiversity: Essential actions to create the social context for meaningful conservation

Freshwater habitats are experiencing two to three times the rate of biodiversity loss of terrestrial and marine habitats. As status quo actions within the conservation community are not reversing the downward trajectory for freshwater biodiversity, we propose four actions to shift the narrative such that freshwater biodiversity is no longer invisible and overlooked, but rather explicitly recognized, valued, and protected: (1) Reshape our relationship with freshwater habitats and biodiversity, (2) Appreciate indigenous knowledge systems relating to freshwater habitats, (3) Connect science more directly to action, and (4) Elevate freshwater habitats as a unique “domain” that requires explicit recognition in conservation planning (RACE). We highlight roles that both freshwater scientists and the wider conservation community can play in implementing the four actions such that the “RACE” can be won.

Conservation Science and Practice↗
USGS2012

Integrated science and interdisciplinary research for parks and protected areas

This paper summarizes presentations and discussion that focused on integrated science and the use of interdisciplinary research during a panel session held at the George Wright Society Meeting in New Orleans, March 14, 2011. The panel brought together nationally recognized members from the social and biological scientific communities, along with decision-makers and managers of parks and protected areas. The goal of the panel was to spark a discussion among panel members and the audience on the benefits and challenges of utilizing interdisciplinary research and integrated science to answer complex questions at the international, national, regional, and local park levels. The key focus points for the panel presentations and subsequent discussion revolved around the following five questions: How do we define interdisciplinary research and integrated science? What are the benefits, drawbacks, and challenges of interdisciplinary research and integrated science? When should this type of science be used? What are the barriers to employing interdisciplinary research and integrated science, and how can those perceived barriers be overcome? What are some examples of situations where this type of science has worked for you? We will break this paper down into seven sections, each summarizing the results of the panel presentations and subsequent audience discussion: 1. How do we define integrated science and interdisciplinary research? 2. The need for integrated science. 3. The challenges of integrated science and interdisciplinary research. 4. The benefits of integrated science and interdisciplinary research. 5. Integrated science in protected area management. 6. Communicating integrated science. 7. Key components to improve scientific outcomes.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2021

Science needs of southeastern grassland species of conservation concern: A framework for species status assessments

The unglaciated southeastern United States is a biodiversity hotspot, with a disproportionate amount of this biodiversity concentrated in grasslands. Like most hotspots, the Southeast is also threatened by human activities, with the total reduction of southeastern grasslands estimated as 90 percent (upwards to 100 percent for some types) and with many threats escalating today. This report summarizes the results of a multistakeholder workshop organized by the Southeastern Grasslands Initiative and the U.S. Geological Survey, held in January 2020 to provide a scientific needs assessment to help inform the Species Status Assessment (SSA) process under the U.S. Endangered Species Act, with a focus on grassland species and communities of conservation concern in the southeastern United States. This report reviews the ecology of southeastern grasslands, including influences on their origin, maintenance, and high species richness and endemism; presents findings from the workshop; and discusses science questions, hypotheses, and possibilities for future research projects to help fill key knowledge gaps. Participants in the January 2020 workshop, representing diverse expertise in various topics in southeastern grassland ecology, were tasked with identifying major threats to grassland species in the Southeast as well as potential ways to make the SSA process more efficient and effective. An underlying assumption and starting place for workshop discussion was that an ecosystem-based approach to the SSA process is more cost-efficient than a species-by-species approach, in large part because many species with similar biological requirements can be addressed by the same actions. Nevertheless, one partner in this effort, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, does require specific attention be given to taxa that have been petitioned for Federal listing, though as often as possible these taxa are considered alongside a larger group of priority taxa with an ecosystem approach. For group discussions, workshop participants followed a modified “World Café” method, a structured conversational approach for knowledge sharing. Group discussions focused on five categories of threats to grassland communities and species: (1) habitat loss, fragmentation, and disruption of functional population connectivity; (2) climate change, especially changes in temperature and precipitation, including intensity and seasonality, and impacts on soil moisture, groundwater levels, and other ecosystem parameters; (3) changes to disturbance regimes, as influenced by climate and land-use change, extinctions, and human attitudes and behaviors; (4) invasive species (not limited to nonnative species); and (5) localized or subregional impacts such as sea-level rise. In addition to group discussions, workshop participants—as well as other grassland experts who were unable to attend the workshop—completed a preworkshop survey concerning challenges and opportunities for grassland conservation. Findings reported here under each of these topics represent ideas, problems, hypotheses, and questions identified by a diverse community of grassland managers and researchers which may be addressed by future research and monitoring in southeastern grassland ecosystems to help guide science-based conservation of grassland-dependent species.

Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Lou↗