SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Biological Science Report”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 73 records · Page 4Linked to original sources

USGS2016

Groundwater science relevant to the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement: A status report

When the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) was signed in 1972 by the Governments of Canada and the United States (the “Parties”) (Environment Canada, 2013a), groundwater was not recognized as important to the water quality of the Lakes. At that time, groundwater and surface water were still considered as two separate systems, with almost no appreciation for their interaction. When the GLWQA was revised in 1978 (US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 2012), groundwater contamination, such as that reported at legacy industrial sites such as those at Love Canal near the Niagara River, was squarely in the news. Consequently, the potential impacts of contaminated groundwater from such sites on Great Lakes water quality became a concern (Beck, 1979), and Annex 16 was added to the agreement, to address “pollution from contaminated groundwater” (Francis, 1989). However, no formal process for reporting under this annex was provided. The GLWQA Protocol in 1987 modified Annex 16 and called for progress reports beginning in 1988 (USEPA, 1988). The Protocol in 2012 provided a new Annex 8 to address groundwater more holistically (Environment 2 Canada, 2013b). Annex 8 (Environment Canada, 2013b) commits the Parties to coordinate groundwater science and management actions; as a first step, to “publish a report on the relevant and available groundwater science” by February 2015 (this report); and to “identify priorities for science activities and actions for groundwater management, protection, and remediation…” The broader mandate of Annex 8 is to (1) “identify groundwater impacts on the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the Waters of the Great Lakes;” (2) “analyze contaminants, including nutrients in groundwater, derived from both point and non-point sources impacting the Waters of the Great Lakes;” (3) “assess information gaps and science needs related to groundwater to protect the quality of the Waters of the Great Lakes;” and (4) “analyze other factors, such as climate change, that individually or cumulatively affect groundwater’s impact on the quality of the Waters of the Great Lakes.” A binational Annex 8 Subcommittee was formed to lead efforts to fulfill the mandate of this annex (members listed on p. i of this report). In turn, this subcommittee has recruited a task team to prepare this report (listed as authors of each chapter). This report addresses all of the above four objectives, based on a compilation of the “relevant and available groundwater science.” Specifically, the second objective (to “analyze contaminants”) is addressed by incorporating information obtained in ongoing monitoring and research activities conducted by the Parties, and by various other members of the Great Lakes Executive Committee.

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, ↗

USGS2014

Quality-assurance and data-management plan for water-quality activities in the Kansas Water Science Center, 2014

As the Nation’s largest water, earth, and biological science and civilian mapping information agency, the U.S. Geological Survey is relied on to collect high-quality data, and produce factual and impartial interpretive reports. This quality-assurance and data-management plan provides guidance for water-quality activities conducted by the Kansas Water Science Center. Policies and procedures are documented for activities related to planning, collecting, storing, documenting, tracking, verifying, approving, archiving, and disseminating water-quality data. The policies and procedures described in this plan complement quality-assurance plans for continuous water-quality monitoring, surface-water, and groundwater activities in Kansas.

Kansas↗

USGS2010

Puget Sound shorelines and the impacts of armoring: Proceedings of a state of the science workshop, May 2009

The widespread extent and continued construction of seawalls and bulkheads on Puget Sound's beaches has emerged as a significant issue in shoreline management and coastal restoration in the region. Concerns about the impacts of shoreline armoring and managing the potential risks to coastal property are in many ways similar to those in other places, but Puget Sound also poses unique challenges related to its sheltered setting, glacially formed geology, rich estuarine ecology, and historical development pattern. The effects of armoring on shorelines are complex, involving both physical and biological science and requiring consideration of the cumulative impacts of small-scale activities over large scales of space and time. In addition, the issue is controversial, as it often places strongly held private interests in protecting shoreline property against broad public mandates to preserve shorelines for public uses and to protect environmental resources. Communities making difficult decisions about regulating shoreline activities and prioritizing restoration projects need to be informed by the best science available. To address these issues, a scientific workshop was convened in May 2009, specifically to bring local and national experts together to review the state of the science regarding the physical and biological impacts of armoring on sheltered shorelines such as those of Puget Sound.

Washington↗

USGS2020

Stressor identification framework of biological impairment in Mississippi streams to support watershed restoration and TMDL development

The Clean Water Act (CWA) requires States to identify waters that are impaired for designated uses. These waters are published through a State’s §303(d) list. The CWA also requires that a total maximum daily load (TMDL) be completed for each water body to calculate the maximum amount of contaminants that can be present in that water body and still meet water-quality standards. The Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) uses a statewide monitoring and assessment strategy to collect benthic macroinvertebrate community data to assess the health of streams and rivers and to identify impaired waters. Waters that are found to be impaired based on the macroinvertebrate community data are listed on the Mississippi §303(d) list, and the cause of impairment is listed as “biological impairment.” Although the CWA requires TMDLs to be developed for applicable contaminants identified in the §303(d) list, TMDLs cannot be computed for stream reaches in Mississippi listed for biological impairment because the actual stressors causing the impairment have not yet been determined. The MDEQ and other water-resource managers in Mississippi require a framework for stressor identification in biologically impaired streams and rivers. This report is organized to (1) provide a general overview of biological impairment and stressor identification in stream ecosystems and (2) provide a detailed framework for stressor identification of Mississippi streams that are biologically impaired. The intent is for the framework to reduce subjectivity, provide consistency, and allow for adaptation as the science evolves. The stressor identification framework for Mississippi involves six key steps: Define the impairment, List the candidate causes of impairment and develop a conceptual model, Compile all relevant data, Evaluate the data, Identify probable causes of impairment by using a weight-of-evidence approach, and Generate a report of results.

Mississippi↗

USGS2009

Approaches to modeling weathered regolith

Sustainable soils are a requirement for maintaining human civilizations ( Carter and Dale 1974 ; Lal 1989 ). However, as the “most complicated biomaterial on the planet” ( Young and Crawford 2004 ), soils represent one of the most difficult systems to understand and model with respect to chemical, physical, and biological coupling over time (Fig. 1 ). Despite the complexity of these interactions, certain patterns in soil properties and development are universally observed and have been used in soil science as a means for classification. Elemental, mineralogical, or isotopic concentrations in soils plotted versus depth beneath the land surface comprise such patterns. Soil depth profiles are often reported for solid soil materials, and, less frequently, for solutes in soil pore waters. These profiles cross a large range in spatial scales that traditionally have been studied by different disciplines. For example, shallow, biologically active horizons are commonly defined as the soil zone in agronomic studies whereas the mobile layer of the regolith is referred to as soil in geomorphological studies. In contrast, many geochemical studies target chemical weathering to tens or even hundreds of meters in depth, sometimes extending the definition of “soils” to include the entire regolith down to parent bedrock or alluvium. Soil profiles also exhibit a large range in temporal scales ( Amundson 2004 ; Brantley 2008b ). Solid-state profiles document chemical and mineralogical changes integrated over the time scales of evolution of regolith from protolith. This “geologic time” can vary from tens to hundreds of years for weathered material developed on moraines deposited by active glaciers ( Anderson et al. 1997 ), to millions or possibly hundreds of millions of years of regolith evolution as documented in laterites and bauxites on stable cratons ( Nahon 1986 ). In contrast, solute profiles reflect much shorter time scales corresponding to the residence time of the soil water which commonly ranges from days to decades ( Stonestrom et al. 1998 ). Factors impacting soil minerals can therefore be related to geologically old processes while those impacting pore waters are related to contemporary processes. We first discuss a geochemical frame work for modeling soil profiles, including a simple scheme that depends on the extent of enrichment or depletion. Such profiles are comprised of reaction fronts affected by chemical, hydrologic, geologic and biologic processes that control soil evolution. We then present a hierarchy of models that have been used to interpret both solid state and solute compositions in regolith. The more simple approaches to model depletion in soils, using analytical models, are first described. The most elementary of these is a linear model that calculates rate constants from the slopes of either solid or solute weathering gradients: these rate constants represent lumped parameters that describe weathering in terms of an integrated reaction rate. Two other analytical models are then presented that have been used to fit solid state elemental profiles with exponential and sigmoidal functions. All of these analytical approaches are derived for models of soils as containing a limited number of components, phases, and species. At a more complex level, numerical models are then presented to elucidate how kinetic and transport parameters as well as chemical, hydrologic, and physical soil data can be incorporated. We consider two forms of these models, first relatively simple spreadsheet calculators and then more sophisticated multi-component, multi-phase reactive-transport numerical codes. Our treatment of reactive transport modeling is relatively cursory, in recognition of the treatment in the chapter by Steefel and Maher (2009 , this volume). Because these models incorporate more phases, components, and species than the other approaches and explicitly model the more fundamental reaction mechanisms involved, they generally have a greater need for parameterization. In our conclusion section, we discuss how this hierarchy of approaches can yield generalizations about soils that are often complementary.

Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry↗

USGS2015

Studies by the U.S. Geological Survey in Alaska, Volume 15

Summary Professional Paper 1814— Studies by the U.S. Geological Survey in Alaska, Volume 15 —continues a long-running series of collected volumes of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientific reports on Alaska. This series presents new and sometimes preliminary findings that are of interest to Earth and biological scientists in academia, government, and industry; to land and resource managers; and to the general public. The series covers a broad spectrum of scientific topics, from various parts of Alaska, serving to emphasize the diversity of USGS efforts to meet the Nation’s needs for Earth-science information in the State. The USGS provides reliable scientific information to describe and understand the Earth; minimize loss of life and property from natural disasters; manage water, biological, energy, and mineral resources; and enhance and protect our quality of life.

Professional Paper↗

USGS2016

Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative—A case study in partnership development

The Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative (WLCI) is a successful example of collaboration between science and natural resource management at the landscape scale. In southwestern Wyoming, expanding energy and mineral development, urban growth, and other changes in land use over recent decades, combined with landscape-scale drivers such as climate change and invasive species, have presented compelling challenges to resource managers and a diverse group of Federal, State, industry, and non-governmental organizations, as well as citizen stakeholders. To address these challenges, the WLCI was established as a collaborative forum and interagency partnership to develop and implement science-based conservation actions. About a decade after being established, this report documents the establishment and history of the WLCI, focusing on the path to success of the initiative and providing insights and details that may be useful in developing similar partnerships in other locations. Not merely retrospective, the elements of the WLCI that are presented herein are still in play, still evolving, and still contributing to the resolution of compelling conservation challenges in the Western United States. The U.S. Geological Survey has developed many successful longstanding partnerships, of which the WLCI is one example. “As the Nation’s largest water, earth, and biological science and civilian mapping agency, the U.S. Geological Survey collects, monitors, analyzes, and provides scientific understanding about natural resource conditions, issues, and problems. The diversity of our scientific expertise enables us to carry out large-scale, multi-disciplinary investigations and provide impartial scientific information to resource managers, planners, and other customers” (U.S. Geological Survey, 2016).

Wyoming↗

USGS2021

Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units program—2020 research abstracts

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) serves as the research arm of the U.S. Department of the Interior and has established a series of strategic goals that focus its efforts on serving the American people. Within the USGS, the Ecosystems Mission Area is responsible for conducting and sponsoring research that addresses the following thematic objectives under the overarching strategic goal of “Science that Supports Our Resources in Wild and Urban Spaces, and the Landscapes In-Between”: Science supporting a legacy of sustainable fish and wildlife, Social science and human components in land, water, and wildlife conservation, Trusted science supporting hard decisions on at-risk species, Science to battle costly biological threats, Providing science for managing risks and responding to extreme events, Science for preservation and restoration of iconic landscapes, and Science to support adaptation and address impacts of climate and land change. This report provides abstracts of most of the ongoing and recently completed research investigations of the USGS Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units program. The report is organized by the following major science themes that contribute to the objectives of the USGS: Advanced Technologies Climate Science Decision Science Ecological Flows Ecosystem Services Energy Fish and Wildlife Health and Disease Human Dimensions Invasive Species Landscape Ecology Species and Habitat Management Species of Greatest Conservation Need Threatened and Endangered Species

Circular↗

USGS2004

Strategic plan for the U.S. Geological Survey status and trends of Biological Resources Program: 2004-2009

The mission of the USGS Status and Trends of Biological Resources Program is to measure, predict, assess, and report the status and trends of the Nation's biological resources to facilitate research, enable resource management and stewardship, and promote public understanding and appreciation of our living resources. Determining the status (abundance, distribution, productivity, and health) and trends (how these variables change over time) of our living natural resources is critical for their Trumpeter swan with numbered wing tags. This tech- protection or restoration. The Progg ran nique allows birds to he monitored remotely without the provides the USGS, other agencies of need for recapture to identify individuals. Photo by the Department of the Interior (DOI), Wayne Miller. other federal and state agencies, and the public with science-based monitoring data and information for local, regional, and national assessment of biological resources and the ecosystems that support them.

Circular↗

USGS2005

Geological, hydrological, and biological issues related to the proposed development of a park at the confluence of the Los Angeles River and the Arroyo Seco, Los Angeles County, California

A new park is being considered for the confluence of the Los Angeles River and the Arroyo Seco in Los Angeles County, California. Components of the park development may include creation of a temporary lake on the Los Angeles River, removal of channel lining along part of the Arroyo Seco, restoration of native plants, creation of walking paths, and building of facilities such as a boat ramp and a visitor center. This report, prepared in cooperation with the Mountains Recreation and Conservancy Authority, delineates the geological, hydrological, and biological issues that may have an impact on the park development or result from development at the confluence, and identifies a set a tasks to help address these science issues. Geologic issues of concern relate to surface faulting, earthquake ground motions, liquefaction, landsliding, and induced seismicity. Hydrologic issues of concern relate to the hydraulics and water quality of both surface water and ground water. Biological issues of concern include colonization-extinction dynamics, wildlife corridors, wildlife reintroduction, non-native species, ecotoxicology, and restoration of local habitat and ecology. Potential tasks include (1) basic data collection and follow-up monitoring, and (2) statistical and probabilistic analyses and simulation modeling of the seismic, hydraulic, and ecological processes that may have the greatest impact on the park. The science issues and associated tasks delineated for the proposed confluence park will also have transfer value for river restoration in other urban settings.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS1991

Geology of caves

A cave is a natural opening in the ground extending beyond the zone of light and large enough to permit the entry of man. Occurring in a wide variety of rock types and caused by widely differing geological processes, caves range in size from single small rooms to intercorinecting passages many miles long. The scientific study of caves is called speleology (from the Greek words spelaion for cave and logos for study). It is a composite science based on geology, hydrology, biology, and archaeology, and thus holds special interest for earth scientists of the U.S. Geological Survey.

General Interest Publication↗

USGS2007

Coastal Prairie Restoration Information System: Version 1 (Louisiana)

The Coastal Prairie Restoration Information System (CPR) is a Microsoft Access database that allows users to query and view data about Louisiana coastal prairie species. Less than 0.1% of Louisiana's coastal prairie vegetation remains in a relatively undisturbed condition. Encompassing as much as 1 million hectares of land, coastal prairie is a hybrid of coastal wetlands and tall grass prairie. Over 550 plant species have been identified in Louisiana's coastal prairies to date. Efforts to conserve and restore this endangered ecosystem are limited by the ability of workers to identify and access knowledge about this diverse group of plants. In this database, a variety of data are provided for each of 650 coastal prairie species in Louisiana. The database was developed at the U.S. Geological Survey National Wetlands Research Center by Larry Allain, with software development by Myra Silva. Additional funding was provided by the biology department of the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (ULL), the ULL Center for Environmental and Ecological Technology, and the National Science Foundation.

Data Series↗

USGS1997

Biology of the Rio Grande border region : A bibliography

This bibliography includes 1,913 references to the literature of the Rio Grande (Rio Bravo del Norte). The specific geographic area covered extends 100 km on either side of the river from Elephant Butte Dam in New Mexico to the Gulf of Mexico. The bibliography focuses on the biological literature, divided into major subject areas, and also includes supporting literature from the physical and environmental sciences.

Rio Grande (Rio Bravo del Norte)↗

USGS2018

Using the value of information to improve conservation decision making

Conservation decisions are challenging, not only because they often involve difficult conflicts among outcomes that people value, but because our understanding of the natural world and our effects on it is fraught with uncertainty. Value of Information (VoI) methods provide an approach for understanding and managing uncertainty from the standpoint of the decision maker. These methods are commonly used in other fields (e.g., economics, public health) and are increasingly used in biodiversity conservation. This decision analytical approach can identify the best management alternative to select where the effectiveness of interventions is uncertain, and can help to decide when to act and when to delay action until after further research. We review the use of VoI in the environmental domain, reflect on the need for greater uptake of VoI, particularly for strategic conservation planning, and suggest promising areas for new research. We also suggest common reporting standards as a means of increasing the leverage of this powerful tool. The environmental science, ecology and biodiversity categories of the Web of Knowledge were searched using the terms ‘Value of Information,’ ‘Expected Value of Perfect Information,’ and the abbreviation ‘EVPI.’ Google Scholar was searched with the same terms, and additionally the terms decision and biology, biodiversity conservation, fish, or ecology. We identified 1225 papers from these searches. Included studies were limited to those that show an application of VoI in biodiversity conservation rather than simply describing the method. All examples of use of VOI were summarised regarding the application of VoI, the management objectives, the uncertainties, models used, how the objectives were measured, and the type of VoI. While the use of VoI appears to be on the increase in biodiversity conservation, the reporting of results is highly variable, which can make it difficult to understand the decision context and which uncertainties were considered. Moreover, it was unclear if, and how, the papers informed management and policy interventions, which is why we suggest a range of reporting standards that would aid the use of VoI. The use of VoI in conservation settings is at an early stage. There are opportunities for broader applications, not only for species-focussed management problems, but also for setting local or global research priorities for biodiversity conservation, making funding decisions, or designing or improving protected area networks and management. The long-term benefits of applying VoI methods to biodiversity conservation include a more structured and decision-focused allocation of resources to research.

Biological Reviews↗

USGS2024

Restoring Pacific Lamprey in the Umpqua River Basin of Oregon: A workshop summary

The Umpqua River Basin in southwestern Oregon (Figure 1) is part of the lands inhabited by the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians and an area of active co-management authority. This Basin supports a unique fish fauna, including important populations of Pacific salmon ( Oncorhynchus spp.) and steelhead ( O. mykiss ), and other native fishes that are endemic to the region (Mims et al. 2018). Among these species, the Pacific Lamprey ( Entosphenus tridentatus ) is one of the most unique, representing an ancient lineage of jawless fishes that long predates the evolution of any other species of fish in the basin (Clemens et al. 2017, 2021a). The Pacific Lamprey also represents an important cultural and food resource that features prominently in the indigenous practices of the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians. This report provides a select summary of topics related to the conservation of Pacific Lamprey in the Umpqua River Basin. Many of the topics addressed herein were discussed in a workshop co-hosted by the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians and the U.S. Geological Survey in April of 2022. This workshop was focused on threats to Pacific Lamprey in fresh waters of the basin. The workshop highlighted science conducted over the past 15 years by local managers and researchers to understand and address these threats and provide new information relevant to the conservation and restoration of Pacific Lamprey. Attendees included staff from the Coquille Indian Tribe, Yakama Nation, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Partnership for Umpqua Rivers, Rogue River Watershed Council, Curry Watersheds Council, PacifiCorp, Trout Unlimited, Jackson Soil and Water Conservation District, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Forest Service. This report provides an overview of this workshop and recent science and provides an overview of potential future efforts that could inform restoration of Pacific Lamprey. This summary is organized into four sections that relate to the main topics of the workshop: 1) The physical habitat template (stream flow, instream wood, sediment, and water temperature), 2) movement barriers and reservoirs, 3) biological invasions, and 4) climate adaptation. These do not represent an exhaustive list of topics related to conservation of Pacific Lamprey in the Umpqua Basin.

Oregon↗

USGS2006

Anaerobic biotransformation of roxarsone and related N-substituted phenylarsonic acids

Large quantities of arsenic are introduced into the environment through land application of poultry litter containing the organoarsenical feed additive roxarsone (3-nitro-4-hydroxyphenylarsonic acid). The objective of this study was to evaluate the bioconversion of roxarsone and related N-substituted phenylarsonic acid derivatives under anaerobic conditions. The results demonstrate that roxarsone is rapidly transformed in the absence of oxygen to the corresponding aromatic amine, 4-hydroxy-3-aminophenylarsonic acid (HAPA). The formation of HAPA is attributable to the facile reduction of the nitro group. Electron-donating substrates, such as hydrogen gas, glucose, and lactate, stimulated the rate of nitro group reduction, indicating a microbial role. During long-term incubations, HAPA and the closely related 4-aminophenylarsonic acid (4-APA) were slowly biologically eliminated by up to 99% under methanogenic and sulfate-reducing conditions, whereas little or no removal occurred in heat-killed inoculum controls. Arsenite and, to a lesser extent, arsenate were observed as products of the degradation. Freely soluble forms of the inorganic arsenical species accounted for 19-28% of the amino-substituted phenylarsonic acids removed. This constitutes the first report of a biologically catalyzed rupture of the phenylarsonic group under anaerobic conditions. ?? 2006 American Chemical Society.

Environmental Science & Technology↗

USGS1999

U.S. Geological Survey programs in Florida, 1999

The safety, health, and economic well-being of Florida?s citizens are important to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), which is involved in water-related, geologic, biological, land use, and mapping issues in many parts of the State. The USGS office in Tallahassee acts as the liaison for all studies conducted by USGS scientists in Florida. Water resources activities are conducted not only from the office in Tallahassee, but also from offices in Miami, Tampa, and Altamonte Springs (Orlando). Scientists in these offices investigate surface water, ground water and water quality in Florida, working in cooperation with other Federal, State and local agencies and organizations. The USGS Center for Coastal Geology and Regional Marine Studies was established in St. Petersburg in 1988, in cooperation with the University of South Florida. The Center conducts a wide variety of research on mineral resources and on coastal and regional marine problems, including coastal erosion, climate change, wetlands deterioration, and coastal pollution. A USGS mapping office is located in St. Petersburg. Also, the Earth Science Information Center (ESIC) in Tallahassee provides USGS information to customers and directs inquiries to the appropriate USGS office or State agency on earth science topics, particularly those related to cartography, geography, aerial photography, and digital data. Biologists at the USGS Florida Caribbean Science Center, located in Gainesville, conduct biological and ecosystem studies in Florida, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.

Florida↗

USGS2017

Scientific monitoring plan in support of the selected alternative of the Glen Canyon Dam Long-Term Experimental and Management Plan

Introduction The purpose of this document is to describe a strategy by which monitoring and research data in the natural and social sciences will be collected, analyzed, and provided to the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), its bureaus, and to the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program (GCDAMP) in support of implementation of the Glen Canyon Dam Long-Term Experimental and Management Plan (LTEMP) (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2016a). The selected alternative identified in the LTEMP Record of Decision (ROD) (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2016b) describes various data collection, analysis, modeling, and interpretation efforts to be conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center (GCMRC), partner agencies, and cooperators that will inform decisions about operations of Glen Canyon Dam and management of downstream resources between 2017 and 2037, the performance period of the LTEMP. General data collection, analysis, modeling, and interpretation activities are described in this science plan, whereas specific monitoring and research activities and detailed study plans are to be described in the GCDAMP’s triennial work plans (TWPs) to be developed by the Bureau of Reclamation and GCMRC with input from partner agencies and cooperators during the LTEMP period, which are to be reviewed and recommended by the GCDAMP and approved by the Secretary of the Interior. The GCDAMP consists of several components, the primary committee being the Adaptive Management Work Group (AMWG). This Federal advisory committee is composed of 25 agencies and stakeholder groups and is chaired by the Secretary of the Interior’s designee. The AMWG makes recommendations to the Secretary of the Interior concerning operations of Glen Canyon Dam and other experimental management actions that are intended to fulfill some obligations of the Grand Canyon Protection Act of 1992. The Technical Work Group (TWG) is a subcommittee of the AMWG and provides technical advice to the AMWG. It is composed of technical and science representatives from the same agencies and stakeholder groups who serve on the AMWG. GCMRC is the primary science provider to the GCDAMP and also coordinates many aspects of the science performed by cooperators and partner agencies. The Science Advisors Program provides independent science reviews and advice at the request of the GCDAMP. The plan proposed here necessarily depends on (1) the protocol for decision-making and the requirements for scientific data reporting described in the LTEMP ROD, (2) the priorities of the GCDAMP as directed by the LTEMP ROD (see Department of the Interior, 2016b, section 6.1), (3) the priorities for monitoring and research in the conservation measures section of the Biological Opinion for the LTEMP (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2016b, LTEMP ROD attachment E), (4) the priorities for resource management and information needs established by Federal and State resource-management agencies within the GCDAMP, (5) scientific understanding about the linkage between the status of those resources and operations of Glen Canyon Dam, and (6) the need to resolve existing scientific uncertainties about the linkage between dam operations and the condition of resources. We note that resource-management prioritization is fundamentally a policy decision charged specifically to DOI for the Colorado River in Glen and Grand Canyons, as outlined most recently in the LTEMP ROD, and is not the responsibility of the GCMRC. However, it is the responsibility of the GCMRC to describe the nature of scientific understanding, the nature of scientific uncertainty, and the risk of making resourcemanagement decisions in the face of existing scientific uncertainty. The goals of science activities in the next 20 years are to inform operational decisions regarding Glen Canyon Dam operations described in the LTEMP ROD, resolve remaining scientific uncertainties, and to monitor resource trends that are affected entirely, or in part, by dam operations.

Open-File Report↗