Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Administrative Report”

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 793 records · Page 44Linked to original sources

National Land Cover Database 2001 (NLCD01) Tree Canopy Layer Tile 2, Northeast United States: CNPY01_2

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

Report↗

National Land Cover Database 2001 (NLCD01) Tree Canopy Layer Tile 3, Southwest United States: CNPY01_3

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

Report↗

National Land Cover Database 2001 (NLCD01) Tree Canopy Layer Tile 4, Southeast United States: CNPY01_4

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

Report↗

Geologic map of science study area 4, Chasma Boreale Region of Mars

This map is one is a series of 1:500,000 scale maps initiated by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to investigate Science Study Areas (selected area of scientific interest) on Mars (fig. 1). The Chasma Boreale region merits detailed geologic study because it contains parts of (1) the north polar ice cap, which is composed of water ice with lesser amounts of carbon dioxide; (2) the layered terrain that recorded climatic and atmospheric changes on Mars during the Amazonian Period; and (3) the enigmatic low-lying polygonal patterned terrain. The map was compiled on a composite of three 1:500,000-scale photomosaic bases (U.S. Geological Survey, 1986a, b, c), each of which is the summer scene of a two-sheet set that includes a spring scene. (Summer scenes, acquired when the north polar ice cap is smallest, show the greatest extent of underlying materials. However, spring scenes that show more detail in specific areas were also used.) Map units (including crater materials) and contacts are generally consistent with those of Howard and others (1982), Dial (1984), and Tanaka and Scott (1987) except where revised on the basis of higher resolution Viking images. Several Viking images were computer enhanced for our mapping.

IMAP↗

Enhanced sidescan-sonar imagery, north-central Long Island Sound

The U.S. Geological Survey, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection have been working cooperatively to map the sea-floor geology within Long Island Sound. Sidescan-sonar imagery collected during three NOAA hydrographic surveys (H11043, H11044, and H11045) was used to interpret the surficial-sediment distribution and sedimentary environments within the Sound. The original sidescan-sonar imagery generated by NOAA was used to evaluate hazards to navigation, which does not require consistent tonal matching throughout the survey. In order to fully utilize these data for geologic interpretation, artifacts within the imagery, primarily due to sidescan-system settings (for example, gain changes), processing techniques (for example, lack of across-track normalization) and environmental noise (for example, sea state), need to be minimized. Sidescan-sonar imagery from surveys H11043, H11044, and H11045 in north-central Long Island Sound was enhanced by matching the grayscale tones between adjacent sidescan-sonar lines to decrease the patchwork effect caused by numerous artifacts and to provide a more coherent sidescan-sonar image for use in geologic interpretation.

New York, Connecticut↗

Evaluation of extraction methods for hexavalent chromium determination in dusts, ashes, and soils

One of the difficulties in performing speciation analyses on solid samples is finding a suitable extraction method. Traditional methods for extraction of hexavalent chromium, Cr(VI), in soils, such as SW846 Method 3060A, can be tedious and are not always compatible with some determination methods. For example, the phosphate and high levels of carbonate and magnesium present in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Method 3060A digestion for Cr(VI) were found to be incompatible with the High Performance Liquid Chromatography-Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry (HPLC-ICP-MS) detection method used by our laboratory. Modification of Method 3060A by eliminating the use of the phosphate buffer provided improved performance with the detection method, however dilutions are still necessary to achieve good chromatographic separation and detection of Cr(VI). An ultrasonic extraction method using a 1 mM Na2CO3 - 9 mM NaHCO3 buffer solution, adapted from Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Method ID215, has been used with good results for the determination of Cr(VI) in air filters. The average recovery obtained for BCR-545 - Welding Dust Loaded on Filter (IRMM, Belgium) using this method was 99 percent (1.2 percent relative standard deviation) with no conversion of Cr(VI) to Cr(III) during the extraction process. This ultrasonic method has the potential for use with other sample matrices, such as ashes and soils. Preliminary investigations using NIST 2701 (Hexavalent Chromium in Contaminated Soil) loaded onto quartz filters showed promising results with approximately 90 percent recovery of the certified Cr(VI) value. Additional testing has been done using NIST 2701 and NIST 2700 using different presentation methods. Extraction efficiency of bulk presentation, where small portions of the sample are added to the bottom of the extraction vessel, will be compared with supported presentation, where small portions of the sample are loaded onto a quartz filter prior to extraction. In addition, results obtained from the standard grinding preparation of NIST 2701 and NIST 2700 will be compared with micronizing to reduce particle size before extraction.

Open-File Report↗

Critical analysis of world uranium resources

The U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration (EIA) joined with the U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to analyze the world uranium supply and demand balance. To evaluate short-term primary supply (0–15 years), the analysis focused on Reasonably Assured Resources (RAR), which are resources projected with a high degree of geologic assurance and considered to be economically feasible to mine. Such resources include uranium resources from mines currently in production as well as resources that are in the stages of feasibility or of being permitted. Sources of secondary supply for uranium, such as stockpiles and reprocessed fuel, were also examined. To evaluate long-term primary supply, estimates of uranium from unconventional and from undiscovered resources were analyzed. At 2010 rates of consumption, uranium resources identified in operating or developing mines would fuel the world nuclear fleet for about 30 years. However, projections currently predict an increase in uranium requirements tied to expansion of nuclear energy worldwide. Under a low-demand scenario, requirements through the period ending in 2035 are about 2.1 million tU. In the low demand case, uranium identified in existing and developing mines is adequate to supply requirements. However, whether or not these identified resources will be developed rapidly enough to provide an uninterrupted fuel supply to expanded nuclear facilities could not be determined. On the basis of a scenario of high demand through 2035, 2.6 million tU is required and identified resources in operating or developing mines is inadequate. Beyond 2035, when requirements could exceed resources in these developing properties, other sources will need to be developed from less well-assured resources, deposits not yet at the prefeasibility stage, resources that are currently subeconomic, secondary sources, undiscovered conventional resources, and unconventional uranium supplies. This report’s analysis of 141 mines that are operating or are being actively developed identifies 2.7 million tU of in-situ uranium resources worldwide, approximately 2.1 million tU recoverable after mining and milling losses were deducted. Sixty-four operating mines report a total of 1.4 million tU of in-situ RAR (about 1 million tU recoverable). Seventy-seven developing mines/production centers report 1.3 million tU in-situ Reasonably Assured Resources (RAR) (about 1.1 million tU recoverable), which have a reasonable chance of producing uranium within 5 years. Most of the production is projected to come from conventional underground or open pit mines as opposed to in-situ leach mines. Production capacity in operating mines is about 76,000 tU/yr, and in developing mines is estimated at greater than 52,000 tU/yr. Production capacity in operating mines should be considered a maximum as mines seldom produce up to licensed capacity due to operational difficulties. In 2010, worldwide mines operated at 70 percent of licensed capacity, and production has never exceeded 89 percent of capacity. The capacity in developing mines is not always reported. In this study 35 percent of developing mines did not report a target licensed capacity, so estimates of future capacity may be too low. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) estimate an additional 1.4 million tU economically recoverable resources, beyond that identified in operating or developing mines identified in this report. As well, 0.5 million tU in subeconomic resources, and 2.3 million tU in the geologically less certain inferred category are identified worldwide. These agencies estimate 2.2 million tU in secondary sources such as government and commercial stockpiles and re-enriched uranium tails. They also estimate that unconventional uranium supplies (uraniferous phosphate and black shale deposits) may contain up to 7.6 million tU. Although unconventional resources are currently subeconomic, the improvement of extraction techniques or the production of coproducts may make extraction of uranium from these types of deposits profitable. A large undiscovered resource base is reported by these agencies, however this class of resource should be considered speculative and will require intensive exploration programs to adequately define them as mineable. These resources may all contribute to uranium supply that would fuel the world nuclear fleet well beyond that calculated in this report. Production of resources in both operating and developing uranium mines is subject to uncertainties caused by technical, legal, regulatory, and financial challenges that combined to create long timelines between deposit discovery and mine production. This analysis indicates that mine development is proceeding too slowly to fully meet requirements for an expanded nuclear power reactor fleet in the near future (to 2035), and unless adequate secondary or unconventional resources can be identified, imbalances in supply and demand may occur.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

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

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

Data Series↗

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

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

northeast United States↗

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

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

Data Series↗

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

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

Data Series↗

Summary of ground-water-quality data in the Anacostia River watershed, Washington, D.C., September-December 2005

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the District Department of the Environment (formerly the District of Columbia, Department of Health, Environmental Health Administration), conducted a ground-water-quality investigation in the Anacostia River watershed within Washington, D.C. Samples were collected and analyzed from 17 ground-water monitoring wells located within the study area from September through December 2005. Samples were analyzed for a variety of constituents including major ions, nutrients, volatile organic compounds, semivolatile organic compounds, pesticides and degradates, oil and grease, phenols, total polychlorinated biphenyls, and other selected constituents. The concentrations of major ions in the study area indicate that the ground water is predominantly calcium-bicarbonate type water, with some wells containing a higher percentage of milliequivalents per liter of iron (cation), and chloride or sulfate (anions). Concentrations of nitrogen were generally less than 1 milligram per liter, and concentrations of phosphorus were generally less than 0.5 milligrams per liter. Twelve of 79 pesticides and degradates were detected at 6 out of 17 wells. Volatile organic compounds (predominantly gasoline oxygenates and solvents) were detected in 9 of the 17 wells. Two semivolatile organic compounds, (bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate and total phenols), out of the 51 analyzed, were detected in the study area.

Washington DC↗

Science-based management of public lands in southern Nevada

Landmark legislation provides guiding principles for land management planning in southern Nevada and the rest of the United States. Such legislation includes, but is not limited to, the Forest Service Organic Administration Act of 1897 (16 U.S>C. 473-478, 479-482 and 551), National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (U.S.C. Title 16, Secs. 1-4). Wilderness Act 1964 (P.L.88-577), National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (P.L. 91-190), Endangered Species Act of 1973 (P.L. 91-205), National Forest Management Act of of 1976 (P.L. 94-588), and Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (P.L. 94-579). The acts establishing congressionally designated areas within southern Nevada, such as Lake Mead National Recreation Area, Spring Mountains National Restoration Area, and Desert National Wildlife Refuge, also contain guidelines for the management of these lands. These documents variously require preservation of natural and cultural resource and wilderness character, protection of species, and prevention of undesirable environmental effects from land management actions. These requirements must be met while allowing for multiple "uses" of certain public lands (e.g. recreation, ranching, resources extraction, renewable energy development, etc.) to the degree that they do no threaten preservation, protection, and prevention goals,. many considerations some into play in the development and implementation for land management plans and actions. The planning process requires a balancing act that sometimes pit one need or priority against another. When priorities can trump other needs can prioritized and receive disproportionate consideration. Overall, the management of public lands is a very complicated and sometime contentious process. Science provides an objective way to help weigh quantifiable information and draw conclusions about the effects of past and potential future land management policies, decisions, and actions. When effectively integrated into adaptive management, science-based information can reduce uncertainties, increase knowledge, and improve decision making. However, the specific science information needed for effective management is often lacking or difficult to access or interpret. Science is typically reported in scientific journals as discrete units describing individual studies with other scientists as the primary audience. Translations of these studies an synthesis or multiple studies into formats that can be readily used in land management planning efforts are often lacking. Identifying and articulating the highest priority science and research needs is one of the primary purposes of the Southern Nevada Agency Partnership (SNAP; http://www.SNAP.gov) Science and Research Team (chapter 1; Turner and others 2009). The SNAP Science and Research Strategy (Strategy) calls for a synthesis report to be written every 5 years summarizing the state of knowledge, information gaps and management implications of scientific information as it relates to the SNAP Strategy goals (Turner and others 2009). This General Technical Report serves as the first SNAP Science and Research Synthesis Report (Synthesis Report) commissioned by the Science and Research Team. The Synthesis Report is mostly based on information form the peer-reviewed scientific literature, and is itself peer reviewed and constitutes a new contribution to the scientific literature. This final chapter addresses Sub-goal 2.3, which is to manage current and future authorized southern Nevada land uses in a manner that balances public need and ecosystem sustainability, and Sub-goal 2.5, which is to promote an effective conservation education and interpretation program to improve the quality of resources and enhance public use and enjoyment of southern Nevada public lands. It summarizes information form the previous chapters on what scientific information is known currently and what remains largely unknown, and it discusses how science can be used to make future management decisions that balances public needs and ecosystem sustainability.

Nevada↗

Satellite telemetry: A new tool for wildlife research and management

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game have cooperated since 1984 to develop and evaluate satellite telemetry as a means of overcoming the high costs and logistical problems of conventional VHF (very high frequency) radiotelemetry systems. Detailed locational and behavioral data on caribou ( Rangifer tarandus ), polar bears ( Ursus maritimus ), and other large mammals in Alaska have been obtained using the Argos Data Collection and Location System (DCLS). The Argos system, a cooperative project of the Centre National d'Études Spatiales of France, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, is designed to acquire environmental data on a routine basis from anywhere on earth. Transmitters weighing 1.6-2.0 kg and functioning approximately 12-18 months operated on a frequency of 401.650 MHz. Signals from the transmitters were received by Argos DCLS instruments aboard two Tiros-N weather satellites in sun-synchronous, nearpolar orbits. Data from the satellites were received at tracking stations, transferred to processing centers in Maryland and France, and made available to users via computer tape, printouts, or telephone links. During 1985 and 1986, more than 25,000 locations and an additional 28,000 sets of sensor data (transmitter temperature and short-term and long-term indices of animal activity) were acquired for caribou and polar bears. Locations were calculated from the Doppler shift in the transmitted signal as the satellite approached and then moved away from the transmitter. The mean locational error for transmitters at known locations (n - 1,265) was 829 m; 90% of the calculated locations were within 1,700 m of the true location. Caribou transmitters provided a mean of 3.1 (+5.0. SD) locations per day during 6h of daily operation, and polar bear transmitters provided 1.7 (+6.9SD) locations during 12h of operation every third day. During the first 6 months of operation, the UHF (ultra-high frequency) signal failed on three of 32 caribou transmitters and 10 of 36 polar bear transmitters. A geographic information system (GIS) incorporating other databases (e.g., land cover, elevation, slope, aspect, hydrology, ice distribution) was used to analyze and display detailed locational and behavioral data collected via satellite. Examples of GIS applications to research projects using satellite telemetry and examples of detailed movement patterns of caribou and polar bears are presented. This report includes documentation for computer software packages for processing Argos data and presents developments, as of March 1987, in transmitter design, data retrieval using a local user terminal, computer software, and sensor development and calibration.

Resource Publication↗

Assessing potential scour using the South Carolina bridge-scour envelope curves

Summary Bridge-scour equations presented in the Federal Highway Administration Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 18 reflect the current state-of-the practice for predicting scour at bridges. Although these laboratory-derived equations provide an important resource for assessing scour potential, there is a measure of uncertainty when applying these equations to field conditions. The uncertainty and limitations have been acknowledged by laboratory researchers and confirmed in field investigations. Because of the uncertainty associated with bridge-scour equations, HEC-18 recommends that engineers evaluate the computed scour depths obtained from the equations and modify the resulting data if they appear unreasonable. Perhaps the best way to evaluate the reasonableness of predicted scour is to compare it to field measurements of historic scour. Historic field data show scour depths resulting from high flows and provide a reference for evaluating predicted scour. It is rare, however, that such data are available at or near a site of interest, making the evaluation of predicted scour as compared to field data difficult if not impossible. Realizing the value of historic scour measurements, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT), conducted a series of three field investigations to collect historic scour data with the goal of understanding regional trends of scour at riverine bridges in South Carolina. Historic scour measurements, including measurements of clear-water abutment, contraction, and pier scour, as well as live-bed contraction and pier scour, were made at more than 200 bridges. These field investigations provided valuable insights into regional scour trends and yielded regional bridge-scour envelope curves that can be used as supplementary tools for assessing all components of scour at riverine bridges in South Carolina. The application and limitations of these envelope curves were documented in four reports. Because each report addresses different components of bridge scour, it was recognized that there was a need to develop an integrated procedure for applying the envelope curves to help assess scour potential at riverine bridges in South Carolina. The result of that effort is detailed in Benedict and others (2016) and summarized in this fact sheet.

South Carolina↗

2019 Forest Service–NASA Joint Applications Workshop: Satellite data to support natural resource management: A framework for aligning NASA products with land management agency needs

In 2019, about 103 participants from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service (Forest Service), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and other federal, private, and academic entities attended the Forest Service–NASA Joint Applications Workshop. The objective of this workshop was to increase awareness and understanding of the capabilities of NASA data products, and strengthen partnerships between NASA and the Forest Service. In this vein, the workshop sought to identify opportunities for collaboration between the Forest Service and NASA on the topics of (1) soil moisture and hydrology, (2) carbon emissions and flux, and (3) vegetation structure and function. Four key high-level opportunities for increased coordination and collaboration were identified including: (1) develop a strategic framework for collaboration and coordination; (2) establish working groups and engage in early adopter programs; (3) distill needs requirements and conduct feasibility studies; and (4) integrate tools and data. Although the workshop was conducted 4 years ago, the information is still highly relevant, since GTAC (Appendix B) and the SMAP, NISAR, ICESAT-2, CMS Programs are all still very active and numerous points of collaboration between the Forest Service and NASA have occurred.

General Technical Report↗

Selawik National Wildlife Refuge land cover mapping project users guide

Title III of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA, 1980) established the Selawik National Wildlife Refuge (SNWR). Section 304 of the Act requires the Secretary of Interior to "prepare, and from time to time revise, a comprehensive conservation plan" for the refuge. Before developing a plan for the refuge, the Secretary shall "identify and describe--a) the populations and habitats of the fish and wildlife resources of the refuge; b) the special values of the refuge as well as any other archeological, cultural, ecological, geological, historical, palentological, scenic, or wilderness value of the refuge; c) areas within the refuge that are suitable for use as administrative sites or visitor facilities...; d) present the potential requirements for access with respect to the refuge...; and e) significant problems which may adversely affect the populations and habitats of fish and wildlife identified and described..." (ANILCA, 1980). Vegetation, water, and terrain (elevation, slope, and aspect) are the components of habitat and can be used in the determination of the above requirements. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) has the responsibility for collecting the resource information to address the research, management, development and planning requirements identified in Section 304. Because of the brief period provided by the Act for data collection, habitat mapping, and habitat assessment, the USFWS in cooperation with the U.S. Geological Survey's EROS Field Office, used digital Landsat multispectral scanner (MSS) data and digital terrain data to produce land cover and terrain maps. A computer assisted digital analysis of Landsat MSS data was used because coverage by aerial photographs was incomplete for the refuge and because the level of detail obtained from Landsat data was adequate to meet most USFWS research, management and planning needs. Relative cost and time requirements were also factors in the decision to use the digital analysis approach.

Alaska↗

Graphic comparison of reserve-growth models for conventional oil and accumulation

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) periodically assesses crude oil, natural gas, and natural gas liquids resources of the world. The assessment procedure requires estimated recover-able oil and natural gas volumes (field size, cumulative production plus remaining reserves) in discovered fields. Because initial reserves are typically conservative, subsequent estimates increase through time as these fields are developed and produced. The USGS assessment of petroleum resources makes estimates, or forecasts, of the potential additions to reserves in discovered oil and gas fields resulting from field development, and it also estimates the potential fully developed sizes of undiscovered fields. The term ?reserve growth? refers to the commonly observed upward adjustment of reserve estimates. Because such additions are related to increases in the total size of a field, the USGS uses field sizes to model reserve growth. Future reserve growth in existing fields is a major component of remaining U.S. oil and natural gas resources and has therefore become a necessary element of U.S. petroleum resource assessments. Past and currently proposed reserve-growth models compared herein aid in the selection of a suitable set of forecast functions to provide an estimate of potential additions to reserves from reserve growth in the ongoing National Oil and Gas Assessment Project (NOGA). Reserve growth is modeled by construction of a curve that represents annual fractional changes of recoverable oil and natural gas volumes (for fields and reservoirs), which provides growth factors. Growth factors are used to calculate forecast functions, which are sets of field- or reservoir-size multipliers. Comparisons of forecast functions were made based on datasets used to construct the models, field type, modeling method, and length of forecast span. Comparisons were also made between forecast functions based on field-level and reservoir- level growth, and between forecast functions based on older and newer data. The reserve-growth model used in the 1995 USGS National Assessment and the model currently used in the NOGA project provide forecast functions that yield similar estimates of potential additions to reserves. Both models are based on the Oil and Gas Integrated Field File from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), but different vintages of data (from 1977 through 1991 and 1977 through 1996, respectively). The model based on newer data can be used in place of the previous model, providing similar estimates of potential additions to reserves. Fore-cast functions for oil fields vary little from those for gas fields in these models; therefore, a single function may be used for both oil and gas fields, like that used in the USGS World Petroleum Assessment 2000. Forecast functions based on the field-level reserve growth model derived from the NRG Associates databases (from 1982 through 1998) differ from those derived from EIA databases (from 1977 through 1996). However, the difference may not be enough to preclude the use of the forecast functions derived from NRG data in place of the forecast functions derived from EIA data. Should the model derived from NRG data be used, separate forecast functions for oil fields and gas fields must be employed. The forecast function for oil fields from the model derived from NRG data varies significantly from that for gas fields, and a single function for both oil and gas fields may not be appropriate.

Bulletin↗