Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Professional Geologist”

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 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
USGS1917

Mechanics of the Panama Canal slides

Dr. Becker visited the Canal Zone in 1913 as a geologist of the United States Geological Survey and since that time has given the problem the benefit of his study. His appointment as a member of the committee of the National Academy of Sciences has made it appropriate for his conclusions, based upon his personal observations and already reported in part to the Canal Commission, to be stated for the benefit of his associates and other American scientists and engineers.

Panama Canal↗
USGS1943

Notes on the early history of water-well drilling in the United States

The standard cable-tool drilling rig was invented and developed in drilling salt wells in the West Virginia-Ohio-Pennsylvania region during the twenty years following the successful completion of the first drilled well in 1808 by the Ruffnet brothers at the Great Buffalo Lick near Charleston, West Virginia. Some time previous to 1823, Levi Disbrow studied the drilling methods used in the western salt industry and came east to become the first professional water well driller in the states north of the Potomac River. Possibly the first artesian water well in the United States was constructed in 1820 in Charleston, South Carolina, by sinking an iron pipe through a clay bed. Auger boring for artesian water appears to have been first used in Charleston, South Carolina, in 1823; however, the first successful auger-bored well was not completed in that city until after 1825. The drilling methods and tools were copied from a description of a well bored in London, England. Between 1821 and 1833 auger boring of artesian wells began in the Black Belt of Alabama and possibly in Mississippi. The process of jetting wells, invented in 1884, became the chief method of sinking artesian wells in the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain by the end of the century. The first successful artesian wells in Georgia and Florida were put down during the period 1880-1882. © 1943 Society of Economic Geologists, Inc.

Economic Geology↗
USGS1997

Reports and maps of the Military Geology Unit, 1942-1975

Included here are reports and maps which were prepared in the Military Geology Unit of the U. S. Geological Survey from 1942 through 1975. In addition to the references prepared primarily for military use and listed here, more than 200 reports of more general geologic interest were prepared for publication as Survey bulletins and professional papers and in outside journals. These reports are listed in "Publications of the Geological Survey" and other bibliographies. Military Geology reports generally include basic subjects such as rock types, soils, water resources, landforms and vegetation, as well as interpretive subjects such as suitability of terrain for cross-country movement and for construction of roads and airfields in areas throughout the world. Reports on specific areas range from generalized texts with small scab maps derived from published sources to detailed texts with large-scale maps commonly based on photo-interpretation and, especially for Alaska and western Pacific islands, involving field mapping. Other reports treat topics of interest in military geology without reference to specific areas. A number of reports covering the moon include the first photogeologic map of the near side. Authors are cited for some kinds of reports; however, many intelligence reports were published anonymously. Most of the reports were prepared by teams made up mainly of geologists but commonly including soils scientists, botanists, climatologists and geographers. Nearly all the soil scientists and climatologists were members of the World Soil Geography Unit, Soil Survey, Soil Conservation Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture. Manuscripts from this Unit were passed through a common review and other processing, as were the manuscripts originating in the Military Geology office, to be issued under the aegis of the latter. In some instances where it has not been possible to list all authors, names of project supervisors are given. File copies of many of the Military Geology reports prepared since 1975 are kept in the Special Geologic Studies Group, U.S. Geological Survey, National Center, Reston, and may be examined there by appropriately cleared persons. Additionally, copies of many of the unclassified studies are in the U.S. Geological Survey Library. Some of the older reports are in the files of the Terrain Analysis Center, Fort Belvoir, Virginia, and other offices within the Corps of Engineers. Most of the reports are out of print and many of the other studies are no longer available.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1970

The Alaska earthquake, March 27, 1964: Lessons and conclusions

One of the greatest earthquakes of all time struck south-central Alaska on March 27, 1964. Strong motion lasted longer than for most recorded earthquakes, and more land surface was dislocated, vertically and horizontally, than by any known previous temblor. Never before were so many effects on earth processes and on the works of man available for study by scientists and engineers over so great an area. The seismic vibrations, which directly or indirectly caused most of the damage, were but surface manifestations of a great geologic event-the dislocation of a huge segment of the crust along a deeply buried fault whose nature and even exact location are still subjects for speculation. Not only was the land surface tilted by the great tectonic event beneath it, with resultant seismic sea waves that traversed the entire Pacific, but an enormous mass of land and sea floor moved several tens of feet horizontally toward the Gulf of Alaska. Downslope mass movements of rock, earth, and snow were initiated. Subaqueous slides along lake shores and seacoasts, near-horizontal movements of mobilized soil (“landspreading”), and giant translatory slides in sensitive clay did the most damage and provided the most new knowledge as to the origin, mechanics, and possible means of control or avoidance of such movements. The slopes of most of the deltas that slid in 1964, and that produced destructive local waves, are still as steep or steeper than they were before the earthquake and hence would be unstable or metastable in the event of another great earthquake. Rockslide avalanches provided new evidence that such masses may travel on cushions of compressed air, but a widely held theory that glaciers surge after an earthquake has not been substantiated. Innumerable ground fissures, many of them marked by copious emissions of water, caused much damage in towns and along transportation routes. Vibration also consolidated loose granular materials. In some coastal areas, local subsidence was superimposed on regional tectonic subsidence to heighten the flooding damage. Ground and surface waters were measurably affected by the earthquake, not only in Alaska but throughout the world. Expectably, local geologic conditions largely controlled the extent of structural damage, whether caused directly by seismic vibrations or by secondary effects such as those just described. Intensity was greatest in areas underlain by thick saturated unconsolidated deposits, least on indurated bedrock or permanently frozen ground, and intermediate on coarse well-drained gravel, on morainal deposits, or on moderately indurated sedimentary rocks. Local and even regional geology also controlled the distribution and extent of the earthquake's effects on hydrologic systems. In the conterminous United States, for example, seiches in wells and bodies of surface water were controlled by geologic structures of regional dimension. Devastating as the earthquake was, it had many long-term beneficial effects. Many of these were socioeconomic or engineering in nature; others were of scientific value. Much new and corroborative basic geologic and hydrologic information was accumulated in the course of the earthquake studies, and many new or improved investigative techniques were developed. Chief among these, perhaps, were the recognition that lakes can be used as giant tiltmeters, the refinement of methods for measuring land-level changes by observing displacements of barnacles and other sessile organisms, and the relating of hydrology to seismology by worldwide study of hydroseisms in surface-water bodies and in wells. The geologic and hydrologic lessons learned from studies of the Alaska earthquake also lead directly to better definition of the research needed to further our understanding of earthquakes and of how to avoid or lessen the effects of future ones. Research is needed on the origins and mechanisms of earthquakes, on crustal structure, and on the generation of tsunamis and local waves. Better earthquake-hazard maps, based on improved knowledge of regional geology, fault behavior, and earthquake mechanisms, are needed for the entire country. Their preparation will require the close collaboration of engineers, seismologists, and geologists. Geologic maps of all inhabited places in earthquake-prone parts of the country are also needed by city planners and others, because the direct relationship between local geology and potential earthquake damage is now well understood. Improved and enlarged nets of earthquake-sensing instruments, sited in relation to known geology, are needed, as are many more geodetic and hydrographic measurements. Every large earthquake, wherever located, should be regarded as a full-scale laboratory experiment whose study can give scientific and engineering information unobtainable from any other source. Plans must be made before the event to insure staffing, funding, and coordination of effort for the scientific and engineering study of future earthquakes. Advice of earth scientists and engineers should be used in the decision-making processes involved in reconstruction after any future disastrous earthquake, as was done after the Alaska earthquake. The volume closes with a selected bibliography and a comprehensive index to the entire series of U.S. Geological Survey Professional Papers 541-546. This is the last in a series of six reports that the U.S. Geological Survey published on the results of a comprehensive geologic study that began, as a reconnaissance survey, within 24 hours after the March 27, 1964, Magnitude 9.2 Great Alaska Earthquake and extended, as detailed investigations, through several field seasons. The 1964 Great Alaska earthquake was the largest earthquake in the U.S. since 1700. Professional Paper 546, in 1 part, describes Lessons and Conclusions.

Alaska↗
USGS2002

Digital mapping techniques '02, workshop proceedings : May 19-22, 2002, Salt Lake City, Utah

The Digital Mapping Techniques '02 (DMT'02) workshop was attended by 101 technical experts from 43 agencies, universities, and private companies, including representatives from 25 state geological surveys (see Appendix A). This workshop was similar in nature to the previous five meetings, held in Lawrence, Kansas (Soller, 1997), in Champaign, Illinois (Soller, 1998a), in Madison, Wisconsin (Soller, 1999), in Lexington, Kentucky (Soller, 2000), and in Tuscaloosa, Alabama (Soller, 2001). This year's meeting was hosted by the Utah Geological Survey, from May 19 to 22, 2002, on the University of Utah campus in Salt Lake City. As in the previous meetings, the objective was to foster informal discussion and exchange of technical information. When an attendee adopts or modifies a newly learned technique on the basis of discussions at the workshop, the workshop clearly has met that objective. Evidence of learning and cooperation among participating agencies continued to be a highlight of the DMT workshops (see example in Soller, 1998b, and various papers in this volume). All the DMT workshops have been coordinated by the Association of American State Geologists (AASG) and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Data Capture Working Group, which was formed in August 1996 to support the AASG and the USGS in their effort to build a National Geologic Map Database (see Soller and Berg, this volume, and http://ncgmp.usgs.gov/ngmdbproject/standards/datacapt/ ). The Working Group was formed because increased production efficiencies, standardization, and quality of digital map products were needed for the database--and the State and Federal geological surveys--to provide more high-quality digital maps to the public. At the 2002 meeting, oral and poster presentations and special discussion sessions emphasized (1) methods for creating and publishing map products (here, "publishing" includes Web-based release); (2) techniques for scanning already published maps and managing and delivering them on the Web; (3) continued development of the National Geologic Map Database; and (4) progress toward building a standard geologic map data model. In addition, special presentations were provided on building a statewide GIS council, incorporating geology as a NSDI Framework layer, and resolving the roles of surveyors and GIS professionals.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2019

U.S. Geological research at Grand Canyon National Park: A century of collaboration

(Fairley) When historians describe the decades preceding designation of Grand Canyon National Park (GCNP), they typically focus attention on early scientific studies conducted by John Wesley Powell, Clarence Dutton, and Charles Walcott. All three of these pioneering scientists were employed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), a small Federal agency first established in 1879. Yet rarely do historians mention later contributions of USGS scientists to the subsequent development and interpretation of GCNP. This article attempts to fill this gap. When GCNP was officially designated on February 26, 1919, Grand Canyon was already a popular, internationally renowned tourist destination. Its reputation derived in no small measure from books and articles written by USGS geologists, which included some of the earliest illustrations and photographs of Grand Canyon. In addition to Powell, Dutton, and Walcott , other noteworthy USGS scientists who contributed to Grand Canyon’s early fame included Francois Matthes who, along with topographers John Stewart and Richard Evans, mapped the Canyon’s topography in painstaking detail during the first decade of the 20th century ; Levi Noble, who mapped the Precambrian geology in the Shinumo area in 1909 , and Nelson Darton, who produced the first popular guidebook about Grand Canyon’s geology for distribution by the Santa Fe Railroad . Thus, by the time Grand Canyon was designated as the Nation’s 15th national park, USGS scientists had laid a solid foundation of basic geological knowledge about this remarkable landscape upon which the National Park Service (NPS) could build. But what about the century that followed? In what respects did USGS personnel contribute to the park’s subsequent development and interpretation? The intent of this article is not to recount every scientific study undertaken by USGS scientists in Grand Canyon during the past century. Instead, this article attempts to document the various roles played by USGS professionals, working in collaboration with NPS personnel, to shape the future development and interpretation of the Park.

Arizona↗
USGS1964

Geology of the Guadalupe Mountains, New Mexico

After the discovery of oil in Permian rocks in Winkler County, Tex., in 1920, petroleum exploration intensified in adjacent parts of western Texas and southeastern New Mexico. Almost immediately unusual stratigraphic complexities were discovered in the Permian rocks. Thus began a long period of stratigraphic investigations, chiefly reconnaissance studies, of the Permian rocks of the Guadalupe Mountains of Texas and New Mexico. Before 1930 some of the complexities began to be resolved as several geologists almost simultaneously recognized the great barrier reef of Capitan age which separates rocks of radically different character. To the northwest is a great sequence of rocks deposited on a platform area, whereas to the southeast lie the rocks of the Delaware basin. The relations of the basin rocks to the rocks of the reef zone were lucidly described by P. B. King (1942, 1948), but confusion and differences of opinion continued about the relations of the shelf rocks to their correlatives in the basin. The present investigation is an attempt, by means of detailed areal mapping, to resolve the relations of the shelf-rock units to one another and to the reef and basin rocks and to clarify the confusing stratigraphic nomenclature.

New Mexico↗
USGS2007

Data sources and compilation

Geologic, production, and exploration/discovery-history data are used by the U.S. Geological Survey to aid in the assessment of petroleum resources. These data, as well as the broad knowledge and experience of the assessing geologists, are synthesized to provide, for each assessment unit, geologic and exploration models upon which estimates are made of the number and sizes of undiscovered accumulations for conventional assessment units or number and total recoverable volumes of untested cells for continuous assessment units (input data for resource calculations). Quantified geologic information and trends in production and exploration/discovery-history data with respect to time and exploration effort provide guides for the estimating parameters of variables recorded on the input-data forms (input data) used to calculate petroleum resources. An Assessment Review Team reviews proposed geologic and exploration models and input data for each assessment unit in formal assessment meetings. The Assessment Review Team maintains the accuracy and consistency of the assessment procedure during the formal assessment meetings.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2006

Groundwater in geologic processes, 2nd edition

Interest in the role of Groundwater in Geologic Processes has increased steadily over the past few decades. Hydrogeologists and geologists are now actively exploring the role of groundwater and other subsurface fluids in such fundamental geologic processes as crustal heat transfer, ore deposition, hydrocarbon migration, earthquakes, tectonic deformation, diagenesis, and metamorphism. Groundwater in Geologic Processes is the first comprehensive treatment of this body of inquiry. Chapters 1 to 4 develop the basic theories of groundwater motion, hydromechanics, solute transport, and heat transport. Chapter 5 applies these theories to regional groundwater flow systems in a generic sense, and Chapters 6 to 13 focus on particular geologic processes and environments. Relative to the first edition of Groundwater in Geologic Processes , this second edition includes a much more comprehensive treatment of hydromechanics (the coupling of groundwater flow and deformation). It also includes new chapters on "compaction and diagenesis," "metamorphism," and "subsea hydrogeology." Finally, it takes advantage of the substantial body of published research that has appeared since the first edition in 1998. The systematic presentation of theory and application, and the problem sets that conclude each chapter, make this book ideal for undergraduate- and graduate-level geology courses (assuming that the students have some background in calculus and introductory chemistry). It also serves as an invaluable reference for researchers and other professionals in the field

Book↗
USGS1919

Deposits of Claiborne and Jackson age in Georgia

In 1911 the Geological Survey of Georgia published as Bulletin 26 a "Preliminary report on the geology of the Coastal Plain of Georgia," by Otto Veatch and Lloyd William Stephenson, prepared in cooperation with the United States Geological Survey under the supervision of T. Wayland Vaughan, a geologist in charge of Coastal Plain investigations, who contributed the determinations of the invertebrate fossils of the Tertiary and Quaternary formations. Although this report constituted a decided advance in our knowledge of the geology of the Coastal Plain of Georgia, it was admittedly of reconnaissance character, and corrections and additions to it were to be expected. During the last few years field work has been prosecuted vigorously in the Coastal Plain of Georgia, and the additional information thus accumulated throws light upon certain problems of stratigraphy left unsolved by Veatch and Stephenson and alters considerably some of their correlations. The object of the present paper is to present the new evidence regarding the age and correlation of the Eocene formations of Georgia and to revise in accordance with present knowledge the descriptions of the deposits of Claiborne and Jackson age.

Georgia↗
USGS1919

A contribution to the geology of northeastern Texas and southern Oklahoma

The region in central and northeastern Texas and southern Oklahoma known as the Black and Grand prairies abounds in features of interest to physiographers, geologists, and paleontologists, and the pioneer investigators of this region must have experienced renewed satisfaction in each day's exploration. The reports of Joseph A. Taff, Robert T. Hill, and others, published chiefly under the auspices of State and Federal surveys, represent with approximate accuracy at most places the general distribution of the outcrops of the formations in this region, and contain detailed descriptions of many sections that constitute a mine of useful information. The reader of the present paper is urged, therefore, to hold as most important the general excellence of the earlier reports of these authors and to relegate the inaccuracies and mistakes to which his attention will be called to the relatively unimportant place in which they belong, remembering at the same time that a future generation of investigators may find our own shortcomings as great as those we now criticize.

Oklahoma;Texas↗
USGS1923

The shapes of beach pebbles

There is much confusion in geologic literature as to the shapes of fluvial and beach pebbles and the differences between them, if differences exist. Though the contrary has been asserted, most geologists who have written on the subject appear to hold the view that beach pebbles are generally flatter than river pebbles, having discoid, lozenge-shaped, ellipsoid, or oval forms. It is asserted by some that these forms are produced by pushing of the rock fragments to and fro by the waves. Others have considered that the shapes of the original fragments and the inherent structure of the rock are dominant in determining the shapes of beach pebbles, and with this view the writer is in accord. That beach pebbles, even those composed of massive igneous rocks are commonly of a flattened oval form seems certain, as has been stated elsewhere, but this fact is probably to be attributed to the development of such forms from original flat fragments or from rocks of schistose structure or to the segregation of such forms under the peculiar action of the waves, rather than to their production by a specialized wave abrasion.

Connecticut;Massachusetts↗
USGS1919

Geology of northeastern Montana

A large region in northeastern Montana has never been thoroughly explored by geologists, owing to the fact that it is a part of the Great Plains and the belief that it is too monotonous and uninteresting to tempt anyone to turn aside from the pronounced geologic features a little farther west, for which Montana is noted. This region includes parts of Sheridan, Valley, Phillips, and Blaine counties. Its investigation was begun by Smith in 1908, when he made a geologic survey of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation. Beekly explored a strip of land along the Montana-North Dakota line from Missouri River to the international boundary, and Bauer examined the townships in which Plentywood and Scobey are situated. Their results are here included with those of the writer, who during the field seasons of 1915 and 1916 was engaged in an investigation of the lignite resources of the remainder of this region, which extends from a line within 12 miles of the Montana-North Dakota boundary westward about 200 miles.

Montana↗
USGS1927

American Tertiary mollusks of the genus Clementia

Aside from its value as an aid in determining the age of Tertiary beds, the chief interest of the genus Clementia lies in the anomalous features of its present and former distribution. An attempt is made in this paper to trace its geologic history, to point out its paleobiologic significance, and to describe all the known American Tertiary species. The fossils from Colombia used in preparing this report were collected during explorations made under the direction of Dr. 0. B. Hopkins, chief geologist of the Imperial Oil Co. (Ltd.), who kindly donated them to the United States National Museum. Dr. T. Wayland Vaughan, of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, furnished information relating to specimens collected by him in Mexico. Dr. Bruce L. Clark, of the University of California; Dr. G. Dallas Hanna, of the California Academy of Sciences; Dr. H. A. Pilsbry, of the Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences; and Dr. W. D. Matthew, of the American Museum of Natural History, generously loaned type specimens and other material. Doctor Clark and Doctor Hanna also gave information concerning the Tertiary species from California. Mr. Ralph B. Stewart, of the University of California, read the manuscript, and I have taken advantage of his suggestions. I am also indebted to Mr. L. R. Cox, of the British Museum, for information relating to the fossil species from Persia, Zanzibar, and Burma, and to Dr. Axel A. Olsson, of the International Petroleum Co., for data concerning undescribed Tertiary species from Peru.

Professional Paper↗
USGS1916

The Pliocene Citronelle Formation of the Gulf Coastal Plain. The flora of the Citronelle Formation

In the spring of 1910 the writer, working under the direction of T. Wayland Vaughan, geologist in charge of Coastal Plain investigations, undertook a study of the later Tertiary formations of the Gulf Coastal Plain. According to the plans outlined before the work was begun, the beds that had formerly been grouped under the names Lafayette formation and Grand Gulf formation were to be studied with a view to their possible separation into more satisfactory stratigraphic units that might be correlated with other formations which, on the basis of their fossils, had been assigned to their proper positions in the geologic time scale. The original plan included a study of the post-Vicksburgian Tertiary deposits from western Florida to Mississippi River and correlations with formations previously recognized in Florida, southern Alabama, and Louisiana. This plan was subsequently modified to extend the investigation as far west as Sabine River. The field work was interrupted and the office work was delayed by calls for geologic work in other areas, so that the preparation of the reports could not be begun until the spring of 1914.

Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi↗
USGS2023

Divisions of geologic time—Major chronostratigraphic and geochronologic units

Introduction Effective communication in the geosciences requires consistent use of stratigraphic nomenclature, especially divisions of geologic time. A geologic time scale is composed of standard stratigraphic divisions that are based on rock sequences and is calibrated in years (Harland and others, 1982). Over the years, the development of new dating methods and the refinement of previous ones have stimulated revisions to geologic time scales. Since the mid-1990s, geologists from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), State geological surveys, academia, and other organizations have sought a consistent time scale that can be used in communicating ages of geologic units in the United States. Many international debates have occurred over the names and boundaries of units, and various time scales have been used by the geoscience community in years past (for example, U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Names Committee [USGS GNC], 2007, 2010, 2018). However, the numerical ages assigned to geochronologic units frequently change as the science of stratigraphy moves forward. Once ratified, changes in numerical ages are recorded by the International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS) on their website ( https://stratigraphy.org/chart ). In addition, such advances in stratigraphy and changes in geochronology require that any time scale be periodically updated. Therefore, the time scale presented in this report (hereafter referred to as “Divisions of Geologic Time”) is dynamic, and it is modified as needed to include accepted changes of unit names and boundary age estimates (USGS GNC, 2007, 2010, 2018).

Professional Paper↗
USGS1948

Geology of the Southern Guadalupe Mountains, Texas

This report deals with an area of 425 square miles in the western part of Texas, immediately south of the New Mexico line. The area comprises the south end of the Guadalupe Mountains and the adjacent part of the Delaware Mountains; it includes the highest peaks in the State of Texas. The area is a segment of a large mountain mass that extends 50 miles or more northward and southward. The report describes the geology of the area, that is, the nature of its rocks, tectonics, and surface features, and the evidence that they give as to the evolution of the area through geologic time. Incidental reference is made to the geology of surrounding regions in order to place the area in its environment. The Permian system of the southwestern United States has been until recently one of the intriguing but little known subjects of American stratigraphy. In the latter half of the nineteenth century after the western. United States was settled, the "red bed" sections of the Permian were studied and reported on by many geologists, but up to 1920 the existence of a contemporaneous marine sequence in western Texas and southeastern New Mexico was little appreciated. Since that year the discovery of extensive oil fields and potash beds in this region gave an impetus to the study of the Permian rocks, and furnished the geologist with records of hundreds of drill holes from which to deduce the nature of the strata not exposed at the surface. At the same time geologists have studied the rocks in the outcropping areas, and have compared them with the strata encountered by drilling. Much remains to be done in order to understand the history of Permian time in the region. The physical and chemical conditions that caused. the deposition of .the various and often complexly related deposits need to be better understood. More of the fossils of the rich and interesting marine faunas should be described, and the relations of the fossils to their environments should be determined. Further, a satisfactory scheme of correlation is needed, and also a subdivision into series that will express the contemporaneity of strata in different areas. One useful contribution to the solution of these problems is the detailed study of sequences of rocks exposed at the surface in the different mountain ranges of Texas and New Mexico. This report deals with one such sequence of rocks in western Texas, the one exposed in the southern Guadalupe Mountains (fig. 1). Here, the Permian rocks are magnificently exposed, to a thickness of about 4,000 feet (pl. 1). They are all of marine origin, and belong to the middle part of the system, with the base concealed and the top absent. Overlying and underlying beds, however, are found in nearby areas.

Texas↗
USGS2014

Characteristics of Hawaiian volcanoes

Founded in 1912 at the edge of the caldera of Kīlauea Volcano, HVO was the vision of Thomas A. Jaggar, Jr., a geologist from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, whose studies of natural disasters around the world had convinced him that systematic, continuous observations of seismic and volcanic activity were needed to better understand—and potentially predict—earthquakes and volcanic eruptions. Jaggar summarized the aim of HVO by stating that “the work should be humanitarian” and have the goals of developing “prediction and methods of protecting life and property on the basis of sound scientific achievement.” These goals align well with those of the USGS, whose mission is to serve the Nation by providing reliable scientific information to describe and understand the Earth; minimize loss of life and property from natural disasters; manage natural resources; and enhance and protect our quality of life. “Characteristics of Hawaiian Volcanoes” establishes a benchmark for the current understanding of volcanism in Hawai‘i, and the articles herein build upon the elegant and pioneering work of Jaggar and many other USGS and academic scientists. Each chapter synthesizes the lessons learned about a specific aspect of volcanism in Hawai‘i, based largely on continuous observation of eruptive activity (like that occurring now at Kīlauea Volcano) and on systematic research into volcanic and earthquake processes during HVO’s first 100 years. Researchers and students interested in basaltic volcanism should find the volume to be a valuable starting point for future investigations of Hawaiian volcanoes and an important reference for decades to come, as well as an informative and entertaining read.

Hawaii↗