Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Conservation and resource management.”

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 829 records · Page 46Linked to original sources
USGS2011

Ecological influence and pathways of land use in sagebrush

Land use in sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) landscapes influences all sage-grouse (Centrocer-cus spp.) populations in western North America. Croplands and the network of irrigation canals cover 230,000 km2 and indirectly influence up to 77% of the Sage-Grouse Conservation Area and 73% of sagebrush land cover by subsidizing synanthropic predators on sage-grouse. Urbanization and the demands of human population growth have created an extensive network of con-necting infrastructure that is expanding its influence on sagebrush landscapes. Over 2,500 km 2 are now covered by interstate highways and paved roads; when secondary roads are included, 15% of the Sage-Grouse Conservation Area and 5% of existing sagebrush habitats are 2.5 km from roads. Density of secondary roads often exceeds 5 km/km 2 , resulting in widespread motorized access for recreation, creating extensive travel corridors for management actions and resource development, subsidizing predators adapted to human presence, and facilitating spread of exotic or invasive plants. Sagebrush lands also are being used for their wilderness and recreation values, including off highway vehicle use. Approximately 12,000,000 animal use months (AUM amount of forage to support one livestock unit per month) are permitted for grazing livestock on public lands in the western states. Direct effects of grazing on sage-grouse populations or sagebrush landscapes are not possible to assess from current data. However, management of lands grazed by livestock has influenced sagebrush ecosystems by vegetation treatments to increase forage and reduce sagebrush and other plant species unpalatable to livestock. Fences (2 km/km 2 in some regions), roads, and water developments to manage livestock movements further modify the landscape. Oil and gas development influences 8% of the sagebrush habitats with the highest intensities occurring in the eastern range of sage-grouse; 20% of the sagebrush distribution is indirectly influenced in the Great Plains, Wyoming Basin, and Colorado Plateau SMZs. Energy development physically removes habitat to construct well pads, roads, power lines, and pipelines; indirect effects include habitat fragmentation, soil disturbance, and facilitation of exotic plant and animal spread. More recent development of alternative energy, such as wind and geothermal, creates infrastructure in new regions of the sage-grouse distribution. Land use will continue to be a dominant stressor on sage-brush systems; its individual and cumulative effects will challenge long-term conservation of sage-grouse populations.

Book chapter↗
USGS2014

Ten ways remote sensing can contribute to conservation

In an effort to increase conservation effectiveness through the use of Earth observation technologies, a group of remote sensing scientists affiliated with government and academic institutions and conservation organizations identified 10 questions in conservation for which the potential to be answered would be greatly increased by use of remotely sensed data and analyses of those data. Our goals were to increase conservation practitioners’ use of remote sensing to support their work, increase collaboration between the conservation science and remote sensing communities, identify and develop new and innovative uses of remote sensing for advancing conservation science, provide guidance to space agencies on how future satellite missions can support conservation science, and generate support from the public and private sector in the use of remote sensing data to address the 10 conservation questions. We identified a broad initial list of questions on the basis of an email chain-referral survey. We then used a workshop-based iterative and collaborative approach to whittle the list down to these final questions (which represent 10 major themes in conservation): How can global Earth observation data be used to model species distributions and abundances? How can remote sensing improve the understanding of animal movements? How can remotely sensed ecosystem variables be used to understand, monitor, and predict ecosystem response and resilience to multiple stressors? How can remote sensing be used to monitor the effects of climate on ecosystems? How can near real-time ecosystem monitoring catalyze threat reduction, governance and regulation compliance, and resource management decisions? How can remote sensing inform configuration of protected area networks at spatial extents relevant to populations of target species and ecosystem services? How can remote sensing-derived products be used to value and monitor changes in ecosystem services? How can remote sensing be used to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of conservation efforts? How does the expansion and intensification of agriculture and aquaculture alter ecosystems and the services they provide? How can remote sensing be used to determine the degree to which ecosystems are being disturbed or degraded and the effects of these changes on species and ecosystem functions?

Conservation Biology↗
USGS2021

Using high resolution satellite and telemetry data to track flooded habitats, their use by waterfowl, and evaluate effects of drought on waterfowl and shorebird bioenergetics in California

Wetland managers in the Central Valley of California, a dynamic hydrological landscape, require information regarding the amount and location of existing wetland habitat to make decisions on how to best use water resources to support multiple wildlife objectives, particularly during drought. Scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey Western Ecological Research Center (WERC), Point Blue Conservation Science (Point Blue), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) partnered to learn how wetland and flooded agricultural habitats used by waterfowl and shorebirds change during the non-breeding season (July–April) particularly during drought. During extreme drought conditions, the ability to provide sufficient water for wildlife often depends on the timing of water deliveries to managed wetlands and winter-flooded crop fields and decisions on whether to fallow croplands. Waterfowl and shorebirds could be particularly affected by these decisions because they typically rest and feed in flooded habitats. Poor habitat conditions resulting from spatially or temporally suboptimal water deliveries (that is, mismatch between waterfowl habitat needs and timing and location of flooded habitats) could reduce waterfowl hunting opportunities and body condition. Point Blue scientists developed a system for near real-time tracking of habitats used by waterfowl, shorebirds, and some other wetland-dependent “waterbirds” ( www.pointblue.org/watertracker ) and to assess the impacts of drought on habitat availability and on waterfowl and shorebird bioenergetics. The WERC researchers linked these data with near real-time tracking (telemetry) data of duck locations throughout the Valley. The team used these two datasets to relate duck locations to open-water characteristics and to learn how waterfowl use habitats under spatially and temporally changing conditions during drought and non-drought periods. We found that recent extreme drought (2013–15) significantly changed the timing and magnitude of flooding and consequently reduced the availability of habitats used by waterfowl and shorebirds more than other recent historic droughts 2000–11. Drought reduced irrigations of moist soil seed plants and thus there was lower food energy available for waterfowl. Analyses using bioenergetics models indicated that, overall, extreme drought increased food energy deficits (total number of deficit days) for shorebirds and waterfowl. Our analysis indicated a strong direct relationship between duck locations and classified habitat derived from open-water data during the wintering period (October–March). This result helps confirm the application of dynamic water data to identify flooded areas that provide waterfowl habitat. Presence of open water at a 1-hectare resolution can be used effectively to identify flooded landscape areas available as habitat for ducks. Our discoveries from evaluating use of space by ducks also indicated that nighttime feeding locations of ducks were concentrated nearby primary roosts and that foraging distances could depend on hydrologic dynamics of location (Suisun Marsh versus California excluding Suisun Marsh) and time of season (early, middle, late). Other results indicated that some areas on the California landscape with extremely reliable water supplies could receive consistent use by ducks year after year (in essence, almost drought proof). The Water Tracker is set up to automatically track wetland habitat and food availability each year and is making these data available to water and wetland managers. Results from this research are a significant step toward understanding how waterfowl and shorebird habitats can be optimally managed on the landscape to support desired populations of these migratory birds during extreme drought.

California↗
USGS2014

Applying threshold concepts to conservation management of dryland ecosystems: Case studies on the Colorado Plateau

Ecosystems may occupy functionally distinct alternative states, some of which are more or less desirable from a management standpoint. Transitions from state to state are usually associated with a particular trigger or sequence of triggers, such as the addition or subtraction of a disturbance. Transitions are often not linear, rather it is common to see an abrupt transition come about even though the trigger increases only incrementally; these are examples of threshold behaviors. An ideal monitoring program, such as the National Park Service’s Inventory and Monitoring Program, would quantify triggers, and be able to inform managers when measurements of a trigger are approaching a threshold so that management action can avoid an unwanted state transition. Unfortunately, both triggers and the threshold points at which state transitions occur are generally only partially known. Using case studies, we advance a general procedure to help identify triggers and estimate where threshold dynamics may occur. Our procedure is as follows: (1) Operationally define the ecosystem type being considered; we suggest that the ecological site concept of the Natural Resource Conservation Service is a useful system, (2) Using all available a priori knowledge to develop a state-and-transition model (STM), which defines possible ecosystem states, plausible transitions among them and likely triggers, (3) Validate the STM by verifying the existence of its states to the greatest degree possible, (4) Use the STM model to identify transitions and triggers likely to be detectable by a monitoring program, and estimate to the greatest degree possible the value of a measurable indicator of a trigger at the point that a state transition is imminent (tipping point), and values that may indicate when management intervention should be considered (assessment points). We illustrate two different methods for attaining these goals using a data-rich case study in Canyonlands National Park, and a data-poor case study in Wupatki National Monument. In the data-rich case, STMs are validated and revised, and tipping and assessment points are estimated using statistical analysis of data. In the data-poor case, we develop an iterative expert opinion survey approach to validate the degree of confidence in an STM, revise the model, identify lack of confidence in specific model components, and create reasonable first approximations of tipping and assessment points, which can later be refined when more data are available. Our goal should be to develop the best set of models possible given the level of information available to support decisions, which is often not much. The approach presented here offers a flexible means of achieving this goal, and determining specific research areas in need of study.

Book chapter↗
USGS2005

Managing water in the West: developing new tools for a critical resource

Rapid population growth in the Western United States over the last century has placed increasing strains on our water supplies and aquatic ecosystems. Historically, water rights have been used to determine the allocation of water in the West, but rules and regulations related to endangered species now often drive how water is released from reservoirs in large rivers such as the lower Colorado and the Columbia. In numerous smaller watersheds, communities are trying to balance the water necessary for human use, irrigation, and the conservation of ecosystems. To assist managers in the face of increasing complexity and uncertainty in water management decision-making, the Western Fisheries Research Center (WFRC) is involved in developing a new generation of integrative tools. Below are some examples of the types of tools that already exist within the WFRC.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS1979

Conservation of marine birds of northern North America: Papers from the international symposium held at the Seattle Hyatt House, Seattle, Washington, 13-15 May 1975

The international symposium "Conservation of Marine Birds of Northern North America" was convened because of a growing awareness that not all was well with our marine birds. The symposium provided a forum for scientists, governmental administrators, conservationists, and laypeople to discuss the diverse topics and issues that we must all understand if we are to act both responsively and responsibly to assure that marine birds will not be lost through our neglect. The symposium was cosponsored by the Natural Resources Council of America, National Audubon Society, National Wildlife Federation, and the U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service; additional support was provided by the Canadian Wildlife Service, the International Association of Game, Fish, and Conservation Commissioners, the Pacific Seabird Group, the Sierra Club, the Smithsonian Institution, the Wildlife Management Institute, and the Wildlife Society. Persons interested and knowledgeable in the many and varied aspects of marine bird conservation were invited to participate in this symposium. There were 139 registered and several score of unregistered participants in attendance. Major topics treated were: (1) socioeconomic considerations and conservation of marine birds; (2) the marine environment of birds; (3) status of marine bird populations on land and sea; (4) the biology and ecology of marine birds in the North; (5) conflicts between the conservation of marine birds and uses of other resources; (6) programs and authorities related to the conservation of marine birds; and (7) conservation of marine birds in other lands.

Wildlife Research Report↗
USGS2005

The challenges associated with developing science-based landscape scale management plans

Planning activities over large landscapes poses a complex of challenges when trying to balance the implementation of a conservation strategy while still allowing for a variety of consumptive and nonconsumptive uses. We examine a case in southeast Alaska to illustrate the breadth of these challenges and an approach to developing a science-based resource plan. Not only was the planning area, the Tongass National Forest, USA, exceptionally large (approximately 17 million acres or 6.9 million ha), but it also is primarily an island archipelago environment. The water system surrounding and going through much of the forest provides access to facilitate the movement of people, animals, and plants but at the same time functions as a barrier to others. This largest temperate rainforest in the world is an exceptional example of the complexity of managing at such a scale but also illustrates the role of science in the planning process. As we enter the 21st century, the list of questions needing scientific investigation has not only changed dramatically, but the character of the questions also has changed. Questions are contentious, cover broad scales in space and time, and are highly complex and interdependent. The provision of unbiased and objective information to all stakeholders is an important step in informed decision-making.

Landscape and Urban Planning↗
USGS2016

Ecoregions of California

Ecoregions denote areas of general similarity in ecosystems and in the type, quality, and quantity of environmental resources. They are designed to serve as a spatial framework for the research, assessment, management, and monitoring of ecosystems and ecosystem components. By recognizing the spatial differences in the capacities and potentials of ecosystems, ecoregions stratify the environment by its probable response to disturbance (Bryce and others, 1999). These general purpose regions are critical for structuring and implementing ecosystem management strategies across Federal agencies, State agencies, and nongovernment organizations that are responsible for different types of resources in the same geographical areas (Omernik and others, 2000). The approach used to compile this map is based on the premise that ecological regions are hierarchical and can be identified through the analysis of the spatial patterns and the composition of biotic and abiotic phenomena that affect or reflect differences in ecosystem quality and integrity (Wiken, 1986; Omernik, 1987, 1995). These phenomena include geology, physiography, vegetation, climate, soils, land use, wildlife, and hydrology. The relative importance of each characteristic varies from one ecological region to another regardless of the hierarchical level. A Roman numeral hierarchical scheme has been adopted for different levels of ecological regions. Level I is the coarsest level, dividing North America into 15 ecological regions. Level II divides the continent into 50 regions (Commission for Environmental Cooperation Working Group, 1997, map revised 2006). At level III, the continental United States contains 105 ecoregions and the conterminous United States has 85 ecoregions (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2013). Level IV, depicted here for California, is a further refinement of level III ecoregions. Explanations of the methods used to define these ecoregions are given in Omernik (1995), Omernik and others (2000), and Omernik and Griffith (2014). California has great ecological and biological diversity. The State contains offshore islands and coastal lowlands, large alluvial valleys, forested mountain ranges, deserts, and various aquatic habitats. There are 13 level III ecoregions and 177 level IV ecoregions in California and most continue into ecologically similar parts of adjacent States of the United States or Mexico (Bryce and others, 2003; Thorson and others, 2003; Griffith and others, 2014). The California ecoregion map was compiled at a scale of 1:250,000. It revises and subdivides an earlier national ecoregion map that was originally compiled at a smaller scale (Omernik, 1987; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2013). This poster is the result of a collaborative project primarily between U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Region IX, USEPA National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory (Corvallis, Oregon), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)–Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Department of the Interior–Geological Survey (USGS), and other State of California agencies and universities. The project is associated with interagency efforts to develop a common framework of ecological regions (McMahon and others, 2001). Reaching that objective requires recognition of the differences in the conceptual approaches and mapping methodologies applied to develop the most common ecoregion-type frameworks, including those developed by the USDA–Forest Service (Bailey and others, 1994; Miles and Goudy, 1997; Cleland and others, 2007), the USEPA (Omernik 1987, 1995), and the NRCS (U.S. Department of Agriculture–Soil Conservation Service, 1981; U.S. Department of Agriculture–Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2006). As each of these frameworks is further refined, their differences are becoming less discernible. Regional collaborative projects such as this one in California, where some agreement has been reached among multiple resource-management agencies, are a step toward attaining consensus and consistency in ecoregion frameworks for the entire nation.

California↗
USGS1997

Source-sink dynamics and the coexistence of species on a single resource

We investigate the potential for coexistence of species that compete for a shared resource when the resource occurs in both a source area acting as a refuge and a sink area where it is used by the competing species. Our model shows that the mixing rate between the source and sink resource populations has a dramatic influence on the outcome of competition. When there is a strict sink–source dependence, so that resource renewal in the sink is entirely dependent on the source, only exploitation competition decides which species can survive at a very small mixing rate. Increasing the flow rate basically amounts to increasing the role played by interference competition. If interspecific interference is very small, compared with intraspecific interference, increasing the mixing rate allows coexistence of many species, indeed, unlimited coexistence if the species' resource exploitation efficiencies are similar enough. If interspecific interference is significant and there is a trade-off between the exploitation and interference competitive abilities of two species, it is possible to have one species replacing the other along a gradient of increasing mixing rate, with either coexistence or alternative single-species equilibria at intermediate values of the mixing rate. It is also possible to have one species always outcompeting the other, or alternative single-species stable equilibria at large mixing rates. When the strict sink–source dependence is relaxed by allowing the resource to have a partly independent renewal–loss dynamics in the sink area, the variety of possible outcomes along a gradient of mixing rate is further increased. These outcomes are often strongly sensitive to the parameters of resource dynamics and interspecific interference competition. The implications of these results for biological conservation can be profound; detailed knowledge of interspecific interactions appears to be necessary to determine the effect of any land management that alters dispersal opportunities.

Theoretical Population Biology↗
USGS2014

Supplemental feeding alters migration of a temperate ungulate

Conservation of migration requires information on behavior and environmental determinants. The spatial distribution of forage resources, which migration exploits, often are altered and may have subtle, unintended consequences. Supplemental feeding is a common management practice, particularly for ungulates in North America and Europe, and carryover effects on behavior of this anthropogenic manipulation of forage are expected in theory, but have received limited empirical evaluation, particularly regarding effects on migration. We used global positioning system (GPS) data to evaluate the influence of winter feeding on migration behavior of 219 adult female elk (Cervus elaphus) from 18 fed ranges and 4 unfed ranges in western Wyoming. Principal component analysis revealed that the migratory behavior of fed and unfed elk differed in distance migrated, and the timing of arrival to, duration on, and departure from summer range. Fed elk migrated 19.2 km less, spent 11 more days on stopover sites, arrived to summer range 5 days later, resided on summer range 26 fewer days, and departed in the autumn 10 days earlier than unfed elk. Time-to-event models indicated that differences in migratory behavior between fed and unfed elk were caused by altered sensitivity to the environmental drivers of migration. In spring, unfed elk migrated following plant green-up closely, whereas fed elk departed the feedground but lingered on transitional range, thereby delaying their arrival to summer range. In autumn, fed elk were more responsive to low temperatures and precipitation events, causing earlier departure from summer range than unfed elk. Overall, supplemental feeding disconnected migration by fed elk from spring green-up and decreased time spent on summer range, thereby reducing access to quality forage. Our findings suggest that ungulate migration can be substantially altered by changes to the spatial distribution of resources, including those of anthropogenic origin, and that management practices applied in one season may have unintended behavioral consequences in subsequent seasons.

Wyoming↗
USGS2010

Mating behavior as a possible cause of bat fatalities at wind turbines

Bats are killed by wind turbines in North America and Europe in large numbers, yet a satisfactory explanation for this phenomenon remains elusive. Most bat fatalities at turbines thus far occur during late summer and autumn and involve species that roost in trees. In this commentary I draw on existing literature to illustrate how previous behavioral observations of the affected species might help explain these fatalities. I hypothesize that tree bats collide with turbines while engaging in mating behaviors that center on the tallest trees in a landscape, and that such behaviors stem from 2 different mating systems (resource defense polygyny and lekking). Bats use vision to move across landscapes and might react to the visual stimulus of turbines as they do to tall trees. This scenario has serious conservation and management implications. If mating bats are drawn to turbines, wind energy facilities may act as population sinks and risk may be hard to assess before turbines are built. Researchers could observe bat behavior and experimentally manipulate trees, turbines, or other tall structures to test the hypothesis that tree bats mate at the tallest trees. If this hypothesis is supported, management actions aimed at decreasing the attractiveness of turbines to tree bats may help alleviate the problem.

Journal of Wildlife Management↗
USGS2025

Data gap analysis for estimation of agricultural return flows in the Upper Gunnison River Basin, Colorado

The Gunnison River and many tributaries in the Upper Gunnison River Basin provide water to irrigate agricultural crops. The application of irrigation water can recharge some aquifers locally by water percolating below the root zone and eventually flowing back to the stream or river through the subsurface. Diverting surface water for irrigation reduces streamflow during the irrigation season but can provide temporary storage of water and supplement streamflow after the snowmelt runoff season. Understanding the timing and quantity of agricultural return flows could help resource managers make informed decisions and adapt to potential changes in water management and availability that could affect irrigation practices. In 2024, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District, began a study to characterize agricultural return flows in the Upper Gunnison River Basin by using endmember mixing analysis and developing a groundwater model. Both approaches require data from multiple sources, but data gaps exist in the East River study reach and other reaches of interest (Ohio Creek, Tomichi Creek, and Cochetopa Creek). The East River Basin, which is the initial focus of the study, has fewer data gaps than the other basins. Data gaps could be addressed by installing additional surface water and groundwater monitoring sites, making regular streamflow measurements on tributaries, and completing tests to characterize local aquifer properties.

Colorado↗
USGS2016

Delineation of areas contributing groundwater to selected receiving surface water bodies for long-term average hydrologic conditions from 1968 to 1983 for Long Island, New York

To assist resource managers and planners in developing informed strategies to address nitrogen loading to coastal water bodies of Long Island, New York, the U.S. Geological Survey and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation initiated a program to delineate a comprehensive dataset of groundwater recharge areas (or areas contributing groundwater), travel times, and outflows to streams and saline embayments on Long Island. A four-layer regional three-dimensional finite-difference groundwater-flow model of hydrologic conditions from 1968 to 1983 was used to provide delineations of 48 groundwater watersheds on Long Island. Sixteen particle starting points were evenly spaced within each of the 4,000- by 4,000-foot model cells that receive water-table recharge and tracked using forward particle-tracking analysis modeling software to outflow zones. For each particle, simulated travel times were grouped by age as follows: less than or equal to 10 years, greater than 10 years and less than or equal to 100 years, greater than 100 years and less than or equal to 1,000 years, and greater than 1,000 years; and simulated ending zones were grouped into 48 receiving water bodies, based on the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Waterbody Inventory/Priority Waterbodies List. Areal delineation of travel time zones and groundwater contributing areas were generated and a table was prepared presenting the sum of groundwater outflow for each area.

New York↗
USGS1999

Boreal partners in flight: Working together to build a regional research and monitoring program

Boreal regions of western North America regularly support breeding populations of 130 species of landbirds, including 68 Nearctic-Neotropical migrants. Primary conservation concerns within the region include increased timber harvesting, insect outbreaks, fire suppression, mining, impacts of military training activities, urbanization, and recreational activities. Under auspices of Partners in Flight, biologists, land and resource managers, and conservationists from Alaska and western Canada have combined efforts to develop a regional research and monitoring program for landbirds. An experimental monitoring program has been under way during the past four years to test the relative statistical power and cost-effectiveness of various monitoring methods in Alaska. Joint efforts currently include the Alaska Checklist Project on National Wildlife Refuges, 75 Breeding Bird Surveys along the road system, 122 Off-road Point Count routes, 27 Monitoring Avian Productivity and Survivorship banding sites, and 8 migration banding stations. The ultimate goal is to design a comprehensive monitoring program that is sensitive to changes in population size, survival rates, and productivity, but robust enough to accommodate logistical constraints that arise when working in vast, roadless areas with limited funds and staff. Primary challenges that must be faced to assure the long-term future of such a program are obtaining long-term commitment from resource agencies in the region, integrating this program with other national and regional programs that address those species and habitats that are inadequately monitored by established techniques, and developing cooperative research, monitoring, and management programs at the landscape level.

Alaska↗
USGS1990

National water summary 1987: Hydrologic events and water supply and use

Water use in the United States, as measured by freshwater withdrawals in 1985, averaged 338,000 Mgal/d (million gallons per day), which is enough water to cover the 48 conterminous States to a depth of about 2.4 inches. Only 92,300 Mgal/d, or 27.3 percent of the water withdrawn, was consumptive use and thus lost to immediate further use; the remainder of the withdrawals (72.7 percent) was return flow available for reuse a number of times as the water flowed to the sea. The 1985 freshwater withdrawals were much less than the average 30 inches of precipitation that falls on the conterminous States each year; consumptive use accounted for only 7 percent of the estimated annual runoff of 1,230,000 Mgal/d. Nonetheless, as the State summaries on water supply and use clearly show, water is not always available when and where it is needed. Balancing water demands with available water supplies constitutes one of the major resource allocation issues that will face the United States in the coming decade. Of the 1985 freshwater withdrawals, 78.3 percent (265,000 Mgal/d) came from surface-water sources (streams and lakes), and 21.7 percent (73,300 Mgal/d) came from ground water. Surface water provided drinking water for about 47 percent of the Nation's total population. It was the source of 59.9 percent of the Nation's public-supply systems. For self-supplied withdrawals, surface water accounted for 1.6 percent of the domestic and commercial uses; 64.0 percent of the industrial and mining use; 99.4 percent of the thermoelectric generation withdrawals, mainly for cooling water; and 65.6 percent of the agricultural withdrawals. Eight States accounted for 43 percent of the surface-water use; California, Colorado, and Idaho used surface water primarily for irrigation, and Dlinois, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas used surface-water primarily for cooling condensers or reactors in thermoelectric plants. Ground water provided drinking water for 53 percent of the Nation's total population and nearly all the rural population. It was the source of 40.1 percent of the public-supply systems withdrawals. For self-supplied withdrawals, ground water accounted for 11.3 percent of the domestic and commercial use, 17.3 percent of the industrial and mining withdrawals, less than 1 percent of the thermoelectric generation withdrawals, and 34.4 percent of the agricultural withdrawals (irrigation and livestock). Eight States Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Nebraska, and Texas accounted for 66 percent of the ground water used. In each of those States, as in many other States, irrigation was the major use of ground water. Each offstream-use category described in the State summaries public supply, domestic and commercial, industrial and mining, thermoelectric power, and agriculture (irrigation and livestock) followed its own geographic pattern as described below. Consumptive use of water effectively removes the water from immediate further use downstream of the withdrawal point. Of the total amount of consumptive water use in 1985, agricultural use accounted for about 82.5 percent. More than one-half (53 percent) of irrigation water is consumptively used by evapotranspiration or is incorporated into the crop. This is a good indication of the effect that irrigated agriculture can have in a river basin where irrigation is a major activity. The availability of return flows for reuse depends largely on where the water reenters the system. If the return flows are discharged to a stream, they usually can be reused; if they are discharged to a saltwater estuary, they are effectively lost to further use because of water-quality degradation just as if the water had been consumptively used. Similarly, water that recharges a highly transmissive aquifer can be available for reuse either through pumpage from a well or as discharge to a local stream. Thus, much of the water withdrawn for different uses can and does become available for further use although the quality might degrade with each additional use. The allocation and the management of water resources are the responsibilities of the individual States and water institutions within the States. These institutions are evolving in response to the challenges of water management problems. As the individual State summaries indicate, recent State legislation deals with facilitating water transfers within the States as a means of reducing imbalances between water supplies and use, with emphasizing water conservation in times of drought and at places where groundwater depletion is a problem of long standing, and with reducing threats to public health and the environment from water pollution. Most of the State summaries indicate the expectation that water use will continue to increase in the future and that water contamination will continue to be a major water concern. Both issues will require increasingly intensive water management in the future. Whether the water resources under management are considered to be fully appropriated or over appropriated, as in some Western States, or whether the resource could support additional development, as is the situation in most States, improved water-use information will play a key role in future water management efforts.

Water Supply Paper↗
USGS1995

History and use of remote sensing for conservation and management of federal lands in Alaska, USA

Remote sensing has been used to aid land use planning efforts for federal public lands in Alaska since the 1940s. Four federal land management agencies-the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, US. Bureau of Land Management, US. National Park Service, and U.S. Forest Service-have used aerial photography and satellite imagery to document the extent, type, and condition of Alaska's natural resources. Aerial photographs have been used to collect detailed information over small to medium-sized areas. This standard management tool is obtainable using equipment ranging from hand-held 35-mm cameras to precision metric mapping cameras. Satellite data, equally important, provide synoptic views of landscapes, are digitally manipulatable, and are easily merged with other digital databases. To date, over 109.2 million ha (72%) of Alaska's land cover have been mapped via remote sensing. This information has provided a base for conservation, management, and planning on federal public lands in Alaska.

Alaska↗
USGS2010

Sharing the floodplain: Mediated modeling for environmental management

Complex ecosystems, such as the Upper Mississippi River (UMR), present major management challenges. Such systems often provide a range of ecosystem services that are differentially valued by stakeholders representing distinct interests (e.g., agriculture, conservation, navigation) or institutions (e.g., federal and state agencies). When no single entity has the knowledge or authority to resolve conflicts over shared resource use, stakeholders may struggle to jointly understand the scope of the problem and to reach reasonable compromises. This paper explores mediated modeling as a group consensus building process for understanding relationships between ecological, economic and cultural well-being in the UMR floodplain. We describe a workshop structure used to engage UMR stakeholders that may be extended to resource use conflicts in other complex ecosystems. We provide recommendations for improving on these participatory methods in structuring future efforts. In conclusion, we suggest that tools which facilitate collaborative learning, such as mediated modeling, need to be incorporated at an institutional level as a vital element of integrated ecosystem management. ?? 2008 Elsevier Ltd.

Environmental Modelling and Software↗
USGS2007

Vascular Plant and Vertebrate Inventory of Tonto National Monument

This report summarizes the results of the first biological inventory of plants and vertebrates at Tonto National Monument (NM). From 2001 to 2003, we surveyed for vascular plants and vertebrates (amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals) at Tonto NM to record species presence. We focused most of our efforts along the Cave Springs riparian area, but surveyed other areas as well. We recorded 149 species in the riparian area, and 369 species overall in the monument, including 65 plant species and four bird species that were previously unrecorded for the monument. We recorded 78 plant species in the riparian area that previous studies had not indicated were present there. Several species of each taxonomic group were found only in the riparian area, suggesting that because of their concentration in this small area these populations are vulnerable to disturbance and may be of management concern. Four of the bird species that we recorded (Bell's vireo, yellow warbler, summer tanager, and Abert's towhee) have been identified as riparian 'obligate' species by other sources. Bird species that are obligated to riparian areas are targets of conservation concern due to widespread degradation of riparian areas in the desert southwest over the last century. The flora and fauna of the riparian area would benefit from continued limited public access. The dependence of the riparian area on the spring and surface flow suggests monitoring of this resource per se would benefit management of the riparian area's flora and fauna as well. The monument would benefit from incorporating monitoring protocols developed by the Sonoran Desert Network Inventory and Monitoring program rather than initiating a separate program for the riparian area. Park managers can encourage the Inventory and Monitoring program to address the unique monitoring challenges presented by small spatial areas such as this riparian area, and can request specific monitoring recommendations. We suggest that repeat inventories for vertebrates, and census (rather than sampling) of perennial vegetation may be the most effective long-term monitoring strategies in the riparian area to verify species persistence through time in this unique and spatially limited environment.

Open-File Report↗