Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Science of Surveying and Mapping”

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 667 records · Page 37Linked to original sources
USGS2008

Proceedings of the U.S. Geological Survey Seventh Biennial Geographic Information Science Workshop, Denver, Colorado, May 12-16, 2008

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Seventh Biennial Geographic Information Science (GIS) Workshop (USGS-GIS 2008) on May 12 through 16, 2008, at the Denver Federal Center in Denver, Colorado, is unique in that it brings together GIS professionals from all of the USGS disciplines across all regions, and focuses primarily on the needs and accomplishments of the USGS. The theme for the 2008 workshop, “GIS for Tomorrow’s Challenges,” provides an opportunity for USGS GIS professionals to demonstrate how they have responded to the challenges set forth in the USGS Science Strategy (http://www.usgs.gov/science_ strategy/). During this workshop, attendees will have an opportunity to present or demonstrate their work; develop their knowledge by attending hands-on workshops and presentations given by professionals from the USGS and other Federal agencies, GIS-related companies, and academia; and to network with other professionals to develop collaborative opportunities. In addition to participation in numerous workshops and presentations, attendees will have opportunities to listen to top-level managers from the USGS present updates and goals concerning the future of several USGS programs. Monday evening’s Star Guest presentation by Thomas Wagner, NSF Office of Polar Programs, and Paul Morin, Antarctic Geospatial Information Center, entitled “Mapping all that is White: Antarctic Science and Operations Viewed Though Geospatial Data,” will be one of many valuable presentations. This Proceedings volume will serve as an activity reference for workshop attendees, as well as an archive of technical abstracts presented at the workshop. Author, co-author, and presenter names, affiliations, and contact information are listed with presentation titles with the abstracts. Some hands-on sessions are offered twice; in these instances, abstracts submitted for publication are presented in the proceedings on both days on which they are offered. All acronyms used in these proceedings are explained in the text of each abstract.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2018

Greater sage-grouse science (2015–17)—Synthesis and potential management implications

Executive Summary The greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ; hereafter called “sage-grouse”), a species that requires sagebrush (Artemisia spp.), has experienced range-wide declines in its distribution and abundance. These declines have prompted substantial research and management investments to improve the understanding of sage-grouse and its habitats and reverse declines in distribution and population numbers. Over the past two decades, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has responded to eight petitions to list the sage-grouse under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, with the completion of the most recent listing determination in September 2015. At that time, the USFWS determined that the sage-grouse did not warrant a listing, primarily because of the large scale science-based conservation and planning efforts completed or started by Federal, State, local agencies, private landowners, and other entities across the range. The planning efforts culminated in the development of the 2015 Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Forest Service Land Use Plan Amendments, which provided regulatory certainty and commitment from Federal land-management agencies to limit, mitigate, and track anthropogenic disturbance and implement other sage-grouse conservation measures. After these policy decisions, the scientific community has continued to refine and expand the knowledge available to inform implementation of management actions, increase the efficiency and effectiveness of those actions, and continue developing an overall understanding of sage-grouse populations, habitat requirements, and their response to human activity and other habitat changes. The development of science has been driven by multiple prioritization documents including the “Greater Sage-Grouse National Research Strategy” (Hanser and Manier, 2013) and, most recently, the “Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy Actionable Science Plan” (Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy Actionable Science Plan Team, 2016). In October 2017, after a review of the 2015 Federal plans relative to State sage-grouse plans, in accordance with Secretarial Order 3353, the BLM issued a notice of intent to consider whether to amend some, all, or none of the 2015 land use plans. At that time, the BLM requested the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to inform this effort through the development of an annotated bibliography of sage-grouse science published since January 2015 and a report that synthesized and outlined the potential management implications of this new science. Development of the annotated bibliography resulted in the identification and summarization of 169 peer-reviewed scientific publications and reports. The USGS then convened an interagency team (hereafter referred to as the “team”) to develop this report that focuses on the primary topics of importance to the ongoing management of sage-grouse and their habitats. The team developed this report in a three-step process. First, the team identified six primary topic areas for discussion based on the members’ collective knowledge regarding sage-grouse, their habitats, and threats to either or both. Second, the team reviewed all the material in the “Annotated Bibliography of Scientific Research on Greater Sage-Grouse Published since January 2015” to identify the science that addressed the topics. Third, team members discussed the science related to each topic, evaluated the consistency of the science with existing knowledge before 2015, and summarized the potential management implications of this science. The six primary topics identified by the team were: Multiscale habitat suitability and mapping tools Discrete anthropogenic activities Diffuse activities Fire and invasive species Restoration effectiveness Population estimation and genetics

Open-File Report↗
USGS2013

U.S. Geological Survey core science systems strategy: Characterizing, synthesizing, and understanding the critical zone through a modular science framework

Executive Summary Core Science Systems is a new mission of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) that resulted from the 2007 Science Strategy, “Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges: U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017.” This report describes the Core Science Systems vision and outlines a strategy to facilitate integrated characterization and understanding of the complex Earth system. The vision and suggested actions are bold and far-reaching, describing a conceptual model and framework to enhance the ability of the USGS to bring its core strengths to bear on pressing societal problems through data integration and scientific synthesis across the breadth of science. The context of this report is inspired by a direction set forth in the 2007 Science Strategy. Specifically, ecosystem-based approaches provide the underpinnings for essentially all science themes that define the USGS. Every point on Earth falls within a specific ecosystem where data, other information assets, and the expertise of USGS and its many partners can be employed to quantitatively understand how that ecosystem functions and how it responds to natural and anthropogenic disturbances. Every benefit society obtains from the planet— food, water, raw materials to build infrastructure, homes and automobiles, fuel to heat homes and cities, and many others— are derived from or affect ecosystems. The vision for Core Science Systems builds on core strengths of the USGS in characterizing and understanding complex Earth and biological systems through research, modeling, mapping, and the production of high quality data on the Nation’s natural resource infrastructure. Together, these research activities provide a foundation for ecosystem-based approaches through geologic mapping, topographic mapping, and biodiversity mapping. The vision describes a framework founded on these core mapping strengths that makes it easier for USGS scientists to discover critical information, share and publish results, and identify potential collaborations that transcend all USGS missions. The framework is designed to improve the efficiency of scientific work within USGS by establishing a means to preserve and recall data for future applications, organizing existing scientific knowledge and data to facilitate new use of older information, and establishing a future workflow that naturally integrates new data, applications, and other science products to make interdisciplinary research easier and more efficient. Given the increasing need for integrated data and interdisciplinary approaches to solve modern problems, leadership by the Core Science Systems mission will facilitate problem solving by all USGS missions in ways not formerly possible. The report lays out a strategy to achieve this vision through three goals with accompanying objectives and actions. The first goal builds on and enhances the strengths of the Core Science Systems mission in characterizing and understanding the Earth system from the geologic framework to the topographic characteristics of the land surface and biodiversity across the Nation. The second goal enhances and develops new strengths in computer and information science to make it easier for USGS scientists to discover data and models, share and publish results, and discover connections between scientific information and knowledge. The third goal brings additional focus to research and development methods to address complex issues affecting society that require integration of knowledge and new methods for synthesizing scientific information. Collectively, the report lays out a strategy to create a seamless connection between all USGS activities to accelerate and make USGS science more efficient by fully integrating disciplinary expertise within a new and evolving science paradigm for a changing world in the 21st century.

Circular↗
USGS2010

Anthropogenic influence on recent bathymetric change in west-central San Francisco Bay

Two multibeam sonar surveys of west-central San Francisco Bay, California, were conducted in 1997 and 2008. Bathymetric change analysis between the two surveys indicates a loss of 14.1 million cubic meters (-3.1 cm/yr) of sediment during this time period, representing an approximately three-fold acceleration of the rate that was observed from prior depth change analysis from 1947 to 1979 for all of Central Bay, using more spatially coarse National Ocean Service (NOS) soundings. The portions of the overlapping survey areas between 1997 and 2008 designated as aggregate mining lease sites lost sediment at five times the rate of the remainder of west-central San Francisco Bay. Despite covering only 28% of the analysis area, volume change within leasing areas accounted for 9.2 million cubic meters of sediment loss, while the rest of the area lost 4.9 million cubic meters of sediment. The uncertainty of this recent analysis is more tightly constrained due to more stringent controls on vertical and horizontal position via tightly coupled, inertially aided differential Global Positioning Systems (GPS) solutions for survey vessel trajectory that virtually eliminate inaccuracies from traditional tide modeling and vessel motion artifacts. Further, quantification of systematic depth measurement error can now be calculated through comparison of static surfaces (e.g., bedrock) between surveys using seafloor habitat maps based on acoustic backscatter measurements and ground-truthing with grab samples and underwater video. Sediment loss in the entire San Francisco Bay Coastal System during the last half-century, as estimated from a series of bathymetric change studies, is 240 million cubic meters, and most of this is believed to be coarse sediment (i.e., sand and gravel) from Central Bay and the San Francisco Bar, which is likely to limit the sand supply to adjacent, open-coast beaches. This hypothesis is supported by a calibrated numerical model in a related study that indicates that there is a potential net export of sand-sized sediment across the Golden Gate, suggesting that a reduction in the supply of sand-sized sediment within west-central San Francisco Bay will limit transport to the outer coast.

California↗
USGS2011

Geophysical data collected from the St. Clair River between Michigan and Ontario, Canada (2008-016-FA)

In 2008, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center (WHCMSC), in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers conducted a geophysical and sampling survey of the riverbed of the Upper St. Clair River between Port Huron, Mich., and Sarnia, Ontario, Canada. The objectives were to define the Quaternary geologic framework of the riverbed of the St. Clair River to evaluate the relationship between morphologic change of the riverbed and underlying stratigraphy. This report presents the geophysical and sample data collected from the St. Clair River, May 29-June 6, 2008, as part of the International Upper Great Lakes Study, a 5-year project funded by the International Joint Commission of the United States and Canada to examine whether physical changes in the St. Clair River are affecting water levels within upper Great Lakes, to assess regulation plans for outflows from Lake Superior, and to examine the potential effect of climate change on the Great Lakes water levels (http://www.iugls.org). This document makes available the data that were used in a separate report, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2009-1137, which detailed the interpretations of the Quaternary geologic framework of the region. This report includes a description of the high-resolution acoustic and sediment-sampling systems that were used to map the morphology, surficial sediment distribution, and underlying geology of the Upper St. Clair River during USGS field activity 2008-016-FA (http://quashnet.er.usgs.gov/cgi-bin/datasource/public_ds_info.pl?fa=2008-016-FA). Video and photographs of the riverbed were also collected and are included in this data release. Future analyses will be focused on substrate erosion and its effects on river-channel morphology and geometry. Ultimately, the International Upper Great Lakes Study will attempt to determine where physical changes in the St. Clair River affect water flow and, subsequently, water levels in the Upper Great Lakes.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2003

Geologic map and digital database of the Yucaipa 7.5’ quadrangle, San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, California

Introduction This geologic database of the Yucaipa 7.5' quadrangle was prepared by the Southern California Areal Mapping Project (SCAMP), a regional geologic-mapping project sponsored jointly by the U.S. Geological Survey and the California Geological Survey. The database was developed as a contribution to the National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program's National Geologic Map Database, and is intended to provide a general geologic setting of the Yucaipa quadrangle. The database and map provide information about earth materials and geologic structures, including faults and folds that have developed in the quadrangle due to complexities in the San Andreas Fault system. The Yucaipa 7.5' quadrangle contains materials and structures that provide unique insight into the Mesozoic and Cenozoic geologic evolution of southern California. Stratigraphic and structural elements include: (1) strands of the San Andreas Fault that bound far-traveled terranes of crystalline and sedimentary rock; (2) Mesozoic crystalline rocks that form lower and upper plates of the regionwide Vincent-Orocopia Thrust system; and (3) late Tertiary and Quaternary sedimentary materials and geologic structures that formed during the last million years or so and that record complex geologic interactions within the San Andreas Fault system. These materials and the structures that deform them provide the geologic framework for investigations of geologic hazards and ground-water recharge and subsurface flow. Geologic information contained in the Yucaipa database is general-purpose data that is applicable to land-related investigations in the earth and biological sciences. The term "generalpurpose" means that all geologic-feature classes have minimal information content adequate to characterize their general geologic characteristics and to interpret their general geologic history. However, no single feature class has enough information to definitively characterize its properties and origin. For this reason the database cannot be used for site-specific geologic evaluations, although it can be used to plan and guide investigations at the site-specific level.

California↗
USGS2021

Procedures for field data collection, processing, quality assurance and quality control, and archiving of relative- and absolute-gravity surveys

Repeat microgravity surveys carried out using relative- and absolute-gravity meters are useful for identifying changes in subsurface mass, such as the volume of water stored in an aquifer. These surveys require careful field procedures to achieve the part-per-billion accuracy required to measure the small changes in gravity relevant for hydrologic studies. This chapter describes techniques and methods for carrying out gravity surveys, requirements for assuring high-quality survey results, and data processing and archival procedures. The focus is on acquiring and documenting repeat gravity surveys for monitoring changes in groundwater storage. Similar gravity surveys may be completed to evaluate other causes of mass change, such as those caused by magma movement below volcanoes. The methods are also useful for one-time surveys that map spatial gravity variations associated with geologic structures such as faults or sedimentary basins. Repeat microgravity surveys can be carried out using relative-gravity meters, absolute-gravity meters, or both. Specific locations, known as gravity stations, are visited during each survey. Most commonly, absolute- and relative-gravity are combined using the least-squares method of network adjustment, much like benchmark elevations and relative-height differences in a leveling network. This chapter primarily describes the use of the A-10 absolute-gravity meter manufactured by Micro-g LaCoste, Inc., and relative-gravity meters made by LaCoste & Romberg (no longer in production) and ZLS Corporation, Inc. Field and office procedures are similar for other instruments such as the FG-5 absolute-gravity meter and Scintrex relative-gravity meters, but some adaptation may be required. Quality control for absolute-gravity data focuses primarily on proper field procedures and maintaining the time and distance calibration of the instrument. Quality control for relative-gravity surveys requires careful field procedures, an understanding of how the meter is behaving while in the field, and appropriate postprocessing. The techniques and methods described in this chapter were developed over 30 years at the USGS Arizona Water Science Center and the Southwest Gravity Program and are the basis for many studies on groundwater-storage change and geologic structure. A description of the Program and complete bibliography is available at https://www.usgs.gov/centers/az-water/science/azwsc-capabilities-hydrologic-gravity-monitoring .

Techniques and Methods↗
USGS2012

Science strategy for Core Science Systems in the U.S. Geological Survey, 2013-2023

Core Science Systems is a new mission of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) that grew out of the 2007 Science Strategy, “Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges: U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007–2017.” This report describes the vision for this USGS mission and outlines a strategy for Core Science Systems to facilitate integrated characterization and understanding of the complex earth system. The vision and suggested actions are bold and far-reaching, describing a conceptual model and framework to enhance the ability of USGS to bring its core strengths to bear on pressing societal problems through data integration and scientific synthesis across the breadth of science. The context of this report is inspired by a direction set forth in the 2007 Science Strategy. Specifically, ecosystem-based approaches provide the underpinnings for essentially all science themes that define the USGS. Every point on earth falls within a specific ecosystem where data, other information assets, and the expertise of USGS and its many partners can be employed to quantitatively understand how that ecosystem functions and how it responds to natural and anthropogenic disturbances. Every benefit society obtains from the planet—food, water, raw materials to build infrastructure, homes and automobiles, fuel to heat homes and cities, and many others, are derived from or effect ecosystems. The vision for Core Science Systems builds on core strengths of the USGS in characterizing and understanding complex earth and biological systems through research, modeling, mapping, and the production of high quality data on the nation’s natural resource infrastructure. Together, these research activities provide a foundation for ecosystem-based approaches through geologic mapping, topographic mapping, and biodiversity mapping. The vision describes a framework founded on these core mapping strengths that makes it easier for USGS scientists to discover critical information, share and publish results, and identify potential collaborations that transcend all USGS missions. The framework is designed to improve the efficiency of scientific work within USGS by establishing a means to preserve and recall data for future applications, organizing existing scientific knowledge and data to facilitate new use of older information, and establishing a future workflow that naturally integrates new data, applications, and other science products to make it easier and more efficient to conduct interdisciplinary research over time. Given the increasing need for integrated data and interdisciplinary approaches to solve modern problems, leadership by the Core Science Systems mission will facilitate problem solving by all USGS missions in ways not formerly possible. The report lays out a strategy to achieve this vision through three goals with accompanying objectives and actions. The first goal builds on and enhances the strengths of the Core Science Systems mission in characterizing and understanding the earth system from the geologic framework to the topographic characteristics of the land surface and biodiversity across the nation. The second goal enhances and develops new strengths in computer and information science to make it easier for USGS scientists to discover data and models, share and publish results, and discover connections between scientific information and knowledge. The third goal brings additional focus to research and development methods to address complex issues affecting society that require integration of knowledge and new methods for synthesizing scientific information. Collectively, the report lays out a strategy to create a seamless connection between all USGS activities to accelerate and make USGS science more efficient by fully integrating disciplinary expertise within a new and evolving science paradigm for a changing world in the 21st century.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2025

Mapping bedrock outcrops in the Sierra Nevada Mountains (California, USA) using machine learning

Accurate, high-resolution maps of bedrock outcrops can be valuable for applications such as models of land–atmosphere interactions, mineral assessments, ecosystem mapping, and hazard mapping. The increasing availability of high-resolution imagery can be coupled with machine learning techniques to improve regional bedrock outcrop maps. In the United States, the existing 30 m U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Land Cover Database (NLCD) tends to misestimate extents of barren land, which includes bedrock outcrops. This impacts many calculations beyond bedrock mapping, including soil carbon storage, hydrologic modeling, and erosion susceptibility. Here, we tested if a machine learning (ML) model could more accurately map exposed bedrock than NLCD across the entire Sierra Nevada Mountains (California, USA). The ML model was trained to identify pixels that are likely bedrock from 0.6 m imagery from the National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP). First, we labeled exposed bedrock at twenty sites covering more than 83 km 2 (0.13%) of the Sierra Nevada region. These labels were then used to train and test the model, which gave 83% precision and 78% recall, with a 90% overall accuracy of correctly predicting bedrock. We used the trained model to map bedrock outcrops across the entire Sierra Nevada region and compared the ML map with the NLCD map. At the twenty labeled sites, we found the NLCD barren land class, even though it includes more than just bedrock outcrops, accounted for only 41% and 40% of mapped bedrock from our labels and ML predictions, respectively. This substantial difference illustrates that ML bedrock models can have a role in improving land-cover maps, like NLCD, for a range of science applications.

California↗
USGS2017

Reducing risk where tectonic plates collide—U.S. Geological Survey subduction zone science plan

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) serves the Nation by providing reliable scientific information and tools to build resilience in communities exposed to subduction zone earthquakes, tsunamis, landslides, and volcanic eruptions. Improving the application of USGS science to successfully reduce risk from these events relies on whole community efforts, with continuing partnerships among scientists and stakeholders, including researchers from universities, other government labs and private industry, land-use planners, engineers, policy-makers, emergency managers and responders, business owners, insurance providers, the media, and the general public. Motivated by recent technological advances and increased awareness of our growing vulnerability to subduction-zone hazards, the USGS is uniquely positioned to take a major step forward in the science it conducts and products it provides, building on its tradition of using long-term monitoring and research to develop effective products for hazard mitigation. This science plan provides a blueprint both for prioritizing USGS science activities and for delineating USGS interests and potential participation in subduction zone science supported by its partners. The activities in this plan address many USGS stakeholder needs: High-fidelity tools and user-tailored information that facilitate increasingly more targeted, neighborhood-scale decisions to mitigate risks more cost-effectively and ensure post-event operability. Such tools may include maps, tables, and simulated earthquake ground-motion records conveying shaking intensity and frequency. These facilitate the prioritization of retrofitting of vulnerable infrastructure; Information to guide local land-use and response planning to minimize development in likely hazardous zones (for example, databases, maps, and scenario documents to guide evacuation route planning in communities near volcanoes, along coastlines vulnerable to tsunamis, and built on landslide-prone terrain); New tools to assess the potential for cascading hazards, such as landslides, tsunamis, coastal changes, and flooding caused by earthquakes or volcanic eruptions; Geospatial models of permanent, widespread land- and sea-level changes that may occur in the immediate aftermath of great ( M ≥8.0) subduction zone earthquakes; Strong partnerships between scientists and public safety providers for effective decision making during periods of elevated hazard and risk; Accurate forecasts of far-reaching hazards (for example, ash clouds, tsunamis) to avert catastrophes and unnecessary disruptions in air and sea transportation; Aftershock forecasts to guide decisions about when and where to re-enter, repair, or rebuild buildings and infrastructure, for all types of subduction zone earthquakes.

Circular↗
USGS2017

Coastal single-beam bathymetry data collected in 2015 from the Chandeleur Islands, Louisiana

As part of the Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority (CPRA) Barrier Island Comprehensive Monitoring Program, scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center conducted a single-beam bathymetry survey around the Chandeleur Islands, Louisiana, in June 2015. The goal of the program is to provide long-term data on Louisiana’s barrier islands and use this data to plan, design, evaluate, and maintain current and future barrier island restoration projects. The data described in this report, along with (1) USGS bathymetry data collected in 2013 as a part of the Barrier Island Evolution Research project covering the northern Chandeleur Islands, and (2) data collected in 2014 in collaboration with the Louisiana CPRA Barrier Island Comprehensive Monitoring Program around Breton Island, will be used to assess bathymetric change since 2006‒2007 as well as serve as a bathymetric control in supporting modeling of future changes in response to restoration and storm impacts. The survey area encompasses approximately 435 square kilometers of nearshore and back-barrier environments around Hewes Point, the Chandeleur Islands, and Curlew and Grand Gosier Shoals. This Data Series serves as an archive of processed single-beam bathymetry data, collected in the nearshore of the Chandeleur Islands, Louisiana, from June 17‒24, 2015, during USGS Field Activity Number 2015-317-FA. Geographic information system data products include a 200-meter-cell-size interpolated bathymetry grid, trackline maps, and xyz point data files. Additional files include error analysis maps, Field Activity Collection System logs, and formal Federal Geographic Data Committee metadata.

Louisiana↗
USGS2015

Archive of sediment data from vibracores collected in 2010 offshore of the Mississippi barrier islands

In 2010, scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center collected sediment cores from coastal waters offshore of the Mississippi barrier islands. With funding support from the Northern Gulf of Mexico (NGOM) Ecosystem Change and Hazard Susceptibility project, 65 subaqueous sediment cores were collected over an area of 480 square kilometers (km 2 ), from Ship Island to Petit Bois Island Pass, Mississippi, within the boundary of Gulf Islands National Seashore. This represents only a fraction of the total area encompassed by the NGOM project, which extends from Sabine Lake, Louisiana, to Perdido Bay, Alabama. The primary objectives of the NGOM project are to understand the evolution of coastal ecosystems on the northern gulf coast, the impact of human activities on these ecosystems, and the vulnerability of ecosystems and human communities to more frequent and intense hurricanes in the future. Selection of the core site locations was based on geophysical surveys conducted around the islands from 2008 to 2010. The surveys, using acoustic systems to image and interpret the nearsurface stratigraphy, were conducted to investigate the geologic controls on island evolution. This data series serves as an archive of sediment data collected from August to September 2010, offshore of the Mississippi barrier islands. Data products, including descriptive core logs, core photographs, results of sediment grain-size analyses, sample location maps, and geographic information system (GIS) data files with accompanying formal Federal Geographic Data Committee (FDGC) metadata can be downloaded from the data products and downloads page.

Mississippi↗
USGS2007

U.S. Geological Survey Activities Related to American Indians and Alaska Natives: Fiscal Year 2005

Introduction This report describes the activities that the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducted with American Indian and Alaska Native governments, educational institutions, and individuals during Federal fiscal year (FY) 2005. Most of these USGS activities were collaborations with Tribes, Tribal organizations, or professional societies. Others were conducted cooperatively with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) or other Federal entities. The USGS is the earth and natural science bureau within the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI). The USGS does not have regulatory or land management responsibilities. As described in this report, there are many USGS activities that are directly relevant to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and to Native lands. A USGS website, dedicated to making USGS more accessible to American Indians, Alaska Natives, their governments, and institutions, is available at www.usgs.gov/indian. This website includes information on how to contact USGS American Indian/Alaska Native Liaisons, training opportunities, and links to other information resources. This report and previous editions are also available through the website. The USGS realizes that Native knowledge and cultural traditions of living in harmony with nature result in unique Native perspectives that enrich USGS studies. USGS seeks to increase the sensitivity and openness of its scientists to the breadth of Native knowledge, expanding the information on which their research is based. USGS scientific studies include data collection, mapping, natural resource modeling, and research projects. These projects typically last 2 or 3 years, although some are parts of longer-term activities. Some projects are funded cooperatively, with USGS funds matched or supplemented by individual Tribal governments, or by the BIA. These projects may also receive funding from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the Indian Health Service (part of the Department of Health and Human Services), or other Federal agencies. The USGS routinely works with its sister bureaus in the Department of the Interior to provide the scientific information and expertise needed to meet the Department's science priorities. Some USGS activities described in this report are conducted as collateral tasks that result from USGS employees identifying and responding to perceived needs. These endeavors are usually prompted by employee interests and frequently involve educational activities. The education is often a reciprocal learning and teaching experience for USGS employees and for Native participants. Through these activities, USGS employees help to fulfill a mission of the USGS - to demonstrate scientific relevance - while helping their fellow citizens. Increasingly, some of the educational activities are becoming parts of formal USGS projects. USGS employees also take initiative in assisting American Indians and Alaska Natives by participating in several organizations that promote awareness of science career opportunities among Native peoples and help build support and communication networks. One such group is the American Indian Science and Engineering Society (AISES). USGS employees join this organization on a voluntary basis, bringing the benefits of this expanded network to the USGS, as many employees do with other professional organizations. The studies briefly described in this report span subsistence issues, wildlife health, water quality, mineral resources, monitoring and modeling to gather information and predict what may happen in the future. Although each project description relates to Native Americans in some way, the projects vary widely, including who conducted the work, the goals and products, the duration of the study, and whether it was local or covered a broad area. Each major organizational unit of the USGS has identified an American Indian/Alaska Native liaison. The USGS has a regional organizational structure, with Western, Central,

Circular↗
USGS1989

The United States Geological Survey: 1879-1989

The United States Geological Survey was established on March 3, 1879, just a few hours before the mandatory close of the final session of the 45th Congress, when President Rutherford B. Hayes signed the bill appropriating money for sundry civil expenses of the Federal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1879. The sundry civil expenses bill included a brief section establishing a new agency, the United States Geological Survey, placing it in the Department of the Interior, and charging it with a unique combination of responsibilities: 'classification of the public lands, and examination of the geological structure, mineral resources, and products of the national domain.' The legislation stemmed from a report of the National Academy of Sciences, which in June 1878 had been asked by Congress to provide a plan for surveying the Territories of the United States that would secure the best possible results at the least possible cost. Its roots, however, went far back into the Nation's history. The first duty enjoined upon the Geological Survey by the Congress, the classification of the public lands, originated in the Land Ordinance of 1785. The original public lands were the lands west of the Allegheny Mountains claimed by some of the colonies, which became a source of contention in writing the Articles of Confederation until 1781 when the States agreed to cede their western lands to Congress. The extent of the public lands was enormously increased by the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 and later territorial acquisitions. At the beginning of Confederation, the decision was made not to hold the public lands as a capital asset, but to dispose of them for revenue and to encourage settlement. The Land Ordinance of 1785 provided the method of surveying and a plan for disposal of the lands, but also reserved 'one-third part of all gold, silver, lead, and copper mines to be sold or otherwise disposed of, as Congress shall thereafter direct,' thus implicitly requiring classification of the lands into mineral and nonmineral. Mapping of the public lands was begun under the direction of the Surveyor-General, but no special provision was made for classification of the public lands, and it thus became the responsibility of the surveyor. There was,of course, no thought in 1785 or for many years thereafter of employing geologists to make the classification of the mineral lands, for geology was then only in its infancy.

Circular↗
USGS2025

Four-band image mosaic of the Colorado River Corridor downstream of Glen Canyon Dam in Arizona, derived from the May 2021 airborne image acquisition

In May 2021, the U.S. Geological Survey’s Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center acquired airborne multispectral high-resolution data for the Colorado River in the Grand Canyon, Arizona. The image data, which consist of four spectral bands (red, band 1; green, band 2; blue, band 3; and near infrared, band 4) with a ground resolution of 20 centimeters, are available as 16-bit unsigned-integer GeoTIFF files in Sankey and others (2024) (available online at https://doi.org/10.5066/P9BBGN6G ). The image files are projected in the State Plane Coordinate System, using the central Arizona zone (202) with the North American Datum of 1983 National Adjustment of 2011. The assessed spatial accuracy for these data is based on 47 ground-control points that were independent from the ground-control points used by the contractor for aerotriangulation and is reported at the 95-percent confidence level as 0.514 meter (m) and a root mean square error of 0.297 m. The intended uses of this dataset are primarily in support of scientific research and monitoring applications. Examples of these applications include high-resolution spatial and temporal change detection of the river channel, geomorphic landforms, riparian vegetation, and backwater and nearshore habitat, as well as other ecosystem-wide mapping. These imagery data also serve as reference material for field science mission planning, as base data for field data collection including community science activities, and as a highly detailed guide for technical boat operation during science activities such as reconnaissance for nighttime missions and navigating rapids during low flows.

Arizona, Nevada, Utah↗
USGS2016

Seismic‐hazard forecast for 2016 including induced and natural earthquakes in the central and eastern United States

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has produced a one‐year (2016) probabilistic seismic‐hazard assessment for the central and eastern United States (CEUS) that includes contributions from both induced and natural earthquakes that are constructed with probabilistic methods using alternative data and inputs. This hazard assessment builds on our 2016 final model ( Petersen et al. , 2016 ) by adding sensitivity studies, illustrating hazard in new ways, incorporating new population data, and discussing potential improvements. The model considers short‐term seismic activity rates (primarily 2014–2015) and assumes that the activity rates will remain stationary over short time intervals. The final model considers different ways of categorizing induced and natural earthquakes by incorporating two equally weighted earthquake rate submodels that are composed of alternative earthquake inputs for catalog duration, smoothing parameters, maximum magnitudes, and ground‐motion models. These alternatives represent uncertainties on how we calculate earthquake occurrence and the diversity of opinion within the science community. In this article, we also test sensitivity to the minimum moment magnitude between M 4 and M 4.7 and the choice of applying a declustered catalog with b =1.0 rather than the full catalog with b =1.3. We incorporate two earthquake rate submodels: in the informed submodel we classify earthquakes as induced or natural, and in the adaptive submodel we do not differentiate. The alternative submodel hazard maps both depict high hazard and these are combined in the final model. Results depict several ground‐shaking measures as well as intensity and include maps showing a high‐hazard level (1% probability of exceedance in 1 year or greater). Ground motions reach 0.6 g horizontal peak ground acceleration (PGA) in north‐central Oklahoma and southern Kansas, and about 0.2 g PGA in the Raton basin of Colorado and New Mexico, in central Arkansas, and in north‐central Texas near Dallas–Fort Worth. The chance of having levels of ground motions corresponding to modified Mercalli intensity (MMI) VI or greater earthquake shaking is 2%–12% per year in north‐central Oklahoma and southern Kansas and New Madrid similar to the chance of damage at sites in high‐hazard portions of California caused by natural earthquakes. Hazard is also significant in the Raton basin of Colorado/New Mexico; north‐central Arkansas; Dallas–Fort Worth, Texas; and in a few other areas. Hazard probabilities are much lower (by about half or more) for exceeding MMI VII or VIII. Hazard is 3‐ to 10‐fold higher near some areas of active‐induced earthquakes than in the 2014 USGS National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM), which did not consider induced earthquakes. This study in conjunction with the LandScan TM Database (2013) indicates that about 8 million people live in areas of active injection wells that have a greater than 1% chance of experiencing damaging ground shaking (MMI≥VI) in 2016. The final model has high uncertainty, and engineers, regulators, and industry should use these assessments cautiously to make informed decisions on mitigating the potential effects of induced and natural earthquakes.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2010

Spatial and stage-structured population model of the American crocodile for comparison of comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) alternatives

As part of the U.S. Geological Survey Priority Ecosystems Science (PES) initiative to provide the ecological science required during Everglades restoration, we have integrated current regional hydrologic models with American crocodile (Crocodylus acutus) research and monitoring data to create a model that assesses the potential impact of Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) efforts on the American crocodile. A list of indicators was created by the Restoration Coordination and Verification (RECOVER) component of CERP to help determine the success of interim restoration goals. The American crocodile was established as an indicator of the ecological condition of mangrove estuaries due to its reliance upon estuarine environments characterized by low salinity and adequate freshwater inflow. To gain a better understanding of the potential impact of CERP restoration efforts on the American crocodile, a spatially explicit crocodile population model has been created that has the ability to simulate the response of crocodiles to various management strategies for the South Florida ecosystem. The crocodile model uses output from the Tides and Inflows in the Mangroves of the Everglades (TIME) model, an application of the Flow and Transport in a Linked Overland/Aquifer Density Dependent System (FTLOADDS) simulator. TIME has the capability to link to the South Florida Water Management Model (SFWMM), which is the primary regional tool used to assess CERP restoration scenarios. A crocodile habitat suitability index and spatial parameter maps that reflect salinity, water depth, habitat, and nesting locations are used as driving functions to construct crocodile finite rate of increase maps under different management scenarios. Local stage-structured models are integrated with a spatial landscape grid to display crocodile movement behavior in response to changing environmental conditions. Restoration efforts are expected to affect salinity levels throughout the habitat of the American crocodile. This modeling effort examines how CERP restoration alternatives will affect growth and survival rates of hatchling and juvenile crocodiles, hatchling dispersal to suitable nursery habitat, and relative abundance and distribution in response to changing salinity and water depth for all stage classes of crocodiles. The response of the American crocodile to restoration efforts will provide a quantifiable measure of restoration success. By applying the crocodile model to proposed restoration alternatives and predicting population responses, we can choose alternatives that approximate historical conditions, enhance habitat for multiple species, and identify future research needs.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2021

A Next Generation Lunar Orbiter mission

The Moon is the scientific foundation for our knowledge of the early evolution and impact history of the terrestrial planets. Over the last decades the lunar science community has made significant progress in addressing key lunar science and exploration goals, while defining many new high-priority scientific questions regarding the formation and evolution of the Moon. On a broad scale, the last Planetary Decadal Survey defined three scientific objectives to guide studies of the inner planets and Moon. These objectives address the origins and diversity of terrestrial planets, the evolution of life on terrestrial planets, and climate processes on Earth-like planets [1]. Many of these objectives carry forward into exploration goals of a renewed lunar human exploration program, and urgently addressing these objectives will enable the rapid development of exploration plans. A large (Flagship or New Frontiers class) Next Generation Lunar Orbiter (NGLO) mission would address the last Planetary Decadal Survey objective of understanding the origin and diversity of terrestrial planets by studying the geochemistry and geology of the Moon at an unparalleled resolution compared to other lunar mission datasets. Also, NGLO would address the objective of studying the evolution of life on terrestrial planets by furthering knowledge about the composition and distribution of volatile elements on the lunar surface and better characterizing the past and present-day impact rates in the inner Solar System in order to better understand the original delivery of water to Earth. Key exploration goals, including identifying the nature and distribution of lunar volatiles (i.e., water, ice), mapping and characterizing potentially valuable lunar resources, and establishing a human presence on the Moon, also would be addressed by NGLO.

Bulletin of the AAS↗