Results for “Information Services and Use” — Page 47

USGS2011

A GIS application for assessing, mapping, and quantifying the social values of ecosystem services

As human pressures on ecosystems continue to increase, research involving the effective incorporation of social values information into the context of comprehensive ecosystem services assessments is becoming more important. Including quantified, spatially explicit social value metrics in such assessments will improve the analysis of relative tradeoffs among ecosystem services. This paper describes a GIS application, So cia l V alues for E cosystem S ervices (SolVES), developed to assess, map, and quantify the perceived social values of ecosystem services by deriving a non-monetary Value Index from responses to a public attitude and preference survey. SolVES calculates and maps the Value Index for social values held by various survey subgroups, as distinguished by their attitudes regarding ecosystem use. Index values can be compared within and among survey subgroups to explore the effect of social contexts on the valuation of ecosystem services. Index values can also be correlated and regressed against landscape metrics SolVES calculates from various environmental data layers. Coefficients derived through these analyses were applied to their corresponding data layers to generate a predicted social value map. This map compared favorably with other SolVES output and led to the addition of a predictive mapping function to SolVES for value transfer to areas where survey data are unavailable. A more robust application is being developed as a public domain tool for decision makers and researchers to map social values of ecosystem services and to facilitate discussions among diverse stakeholders involving relative tradeoffs among different ecosystem services in a variety of physical and social contexts.

Applied Geography↗

USGS2008

National Land Cover Database 2001 (NLCD01) Tile 2, Northeast United States: NLCD01_2

This 30-meter data set represents land use and land cover 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 (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/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 (http://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), (see: 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 (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/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↗

USGS2016

National Land Cover Database 2001 (NLCD01)

This 30-meter data set represents land use and land cover 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 (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/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 (http://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), (see: 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 (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/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↗

USGS2008

National Land Cover Database 2001 (NLCD01) Tile 1, Northwest United States: NLCD01_1

This 30-meter data set represents land use and land cover 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 (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/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 (http://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), (see: 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 (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/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↗

USGS2008

National Land Cover Database 2001 (NLCD01) Tile 4, Southeast United States: NLCD01_4

This 30-meter data set represents land use and land cover 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 (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/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 (http://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), (see: 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 (see http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/browse/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↗

USGS2012

Topographic change detection at select archeological sites in Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona, 2007-2010

Human occupation in Grand Canyon, Arizona, dates from at least 11,000 years before present to the modern era. For most of this period, the only evidence of human occupation in this iconic landscape is provided by archeological sites. Because of the dynamic nature of this environment, many archeological sites are subject to relatively rapid topographic change. Quantifying the extent, magnitude, and cause of such change is important for monitoring and managing these archeological sites. Such quantification is necessary to help inform the continuing debate on whether and how controlled releases from Glen Canyon Dam, located immediately upstream of Grand Canyon National Park, are affecting site erosion rates, artifact transport, and archeological resource preservation along the Colorado River in Grand Canyon. Although long-term topographic change resulting from a variety of natural processes is inherent in the Grand Canyon region, continued erosion of archeological sites threatens both the archeological resources and our future ability to study evidence of past cultural habitation. Thus, this subject is of considerable interest to National Park Service managers and other stakeholders in the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program. Understanding the causes and effects of archeological site erosion requires a knowledge of several factors, including the location, timing, and magnitude of the changes occurring in relation to archeological resources, the rates of change, and the relative contribution of potential causes. These potential causes include sediment depletion associated with managed flows from Glen Canyon Dam, site-specific weather and overland flow patterns, visitor impacts, and long-term regional climate change. To obtain this information, highly accurate, spatially specific data are needed from sites undergoing change. Using terrestrial lidar techniques, and building upon three previous surveys of archeological sites performed in 2006 and 2007, we collected two new datasets in April and September 2010 and processed and improved upon existing methods to generate high-accuracy (3 to 5 cm vertical change threshold) topographic change-detection maps for 10 survey areas encompassing 9 archeological sites along the Colorado River corridor. We also used terrestrial lidar techniques to investigate several other metrics for studying archeological site stability, including monitoring cultural structures and artifacts and remotely measuring cryptobiotic soil crust areas. Our topographic change results indicate that 9 of 10 survey areas showed signs of either erosion, deposition, or both during the 2007–2010 time interval and that these changes can be linked to a variety of geomorphic processes, primarily overland flow gullying and aeolian sand transport. In several cases, large (>50 cm) vertical change occurred, and in one case, more than 100 m 3 of sediment was eroded. Further, for all sites monitored throughout the river corridor during this time period, the overall signal was related to erosion rather than deposition. These results highlight the potential for rapid archeological site change in Grand Canyon. Whereas the topographic change results presented herein provide the highest level of change detection yet performed on entire archeological sites in Grand Canyon, additional work in combining these results with site-specific weather, hydrology, and geomorphology data is needed to provide a more thorough understanding of the causes of the documented topographic changes. Linking lidar-derived measurements of topographic changes with these other data sources should provide land managers with a scientific basis for making management decisions regarding archeological resources in Grand Canyon National Park and assist in answering open questions regarding the influence that sediment-depleted flows from Glen Canyon Dam have on archeological site stability.

Arizona↗

USGS2013

Organic wastewater compounds in water and sediment in and near restored wetlands, Great Marsh, Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, 2009–11

A cooperative investigation between the U.S. Geological Survey and the National Park Service was completed from 2009 through 2011 to understand the occurrence, distribution, and environmental processes affecting concentrations of organic wastewater compounds in water and sediment in and near Great Marsh at the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore in Beverly Shores, Indiana. Sampling sites were selected to represent hydrologic inputs to the restored wetlands from adjacent upstream residential and less developed areas and to represent discharge points of cascading cells within the restored wetland. A multiphase approach was used for the investigation. Discrete water samples and time-integrated passive samples were analyzed for 69 organic wastewater compounds. Continuous water-level information and periodic streamflow measurements characterized flow conditions at discharge points from restored wetland cells. Wetland sediments were collected and analyzed for sorptive losses of organic wastewater compounds and to evaluate of the potential for wetland sediments to biotransform organic wastewater compounds. A total of 52 organic wastewater compounds were detected in discrete water samples at 1 or more sites. Detections of organic wastewater compounds were widespread, but concentrations were generally low and 95 percent were less than 2.1 micrograms per liter. Six compounds were detected at concentrations greater than 2.1 micrograms per liter—four fecal sterols (beta-sitosterol, cholesterol, beta-stigmastanol, and 2-beta coprostanol), one plasticizer (bis-2-ethylhex ylphthalate), and a non-ionic detergent (4-nonylphenol diethoxylate). Two 1-month deployments of time-integrative passive samplers, called polar organic chemical integrative samplers, detected organic wastewater compounds at lower concentrations than were possible with discrete water samples. Isopropyl benzene (solvent), caffeine (plant alkaloid, stimulant), and hexahydrohexamethyl cyclopentabenzopyran (fragrance) were detected in more than half of the extracts from passive samplers, but they were not detected in any discrete water sample. The Yeast Estrogen Screen assay identified measurable estrogenicity in one passive sampler extract from the most downstream wetland site in both the April and November–December 2011 deployments and in passive sampler extracts from one residential and one upstream site in the November–December 2011 deployment only. Surface-water levels in the restored wetland cells were monitored continuously using submersible pressure transducers in hand-driven well points screened in the surface water. Surface-water levels in the wetland cells responded quickly to precipitation and substantially receded within 2 days following the largest rainfall events. Seasonal patterns in water levels generally showed higher and more variable surface-water levels in the wetland cells during spring and early summer. Water levels in the wetland cells fell below the elevation of the control structures and ceased to flow over the spillways during extended dry periods (primarily late summer and early fall). Daily loads of seven organic wastewater compounds, as indicators of septic system effluent, were estimated for samples collected at wetland outlet spillways when flow measurements could be made. Median daily loads of the indicator organic wastewater compounds increased in downstream order, and the largest median loads were measured at the most downstream site. Median daily loads were higher for samples collected in spring and summer than those collected in fall, as the higher seasonal water levels increased streamflow at the wetland outlet spillways. Wetland sediment samples were analyzed for 84 organic wastewater compounds, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and semivolatile organic compounds to investigate the fate of contaminants in Great Marsh. The top five detected compounds by total mass in wetland sediment samples were beta-sitosterol, beta-stigmastanol, cholesterol, bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, and phenol. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons also were frequently detected in wetland sediment samples. Source apportionment of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon detections indicated atmospheric sources of pyrogenic compounds, rather than residential sources. Comparisons of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon concentrations in wetland sediment samples to sediment quality target guidelines indicated the potential for harmful effects on sediment-dwelling organisms at several sites. Biodegradation of select endocrine-disrupting compounds (17α-ethinylestradiol, 4-nonylphenol, triclocarban, and bisphenol A) in shallow wetland sediments was evaluated in laboratory experiments by using carbon-14 radiolabeled model contaminants. Substantial biodegradation of certain organic wastewater compounds were demonstrated, primarily in oxic (oxygen containing) environments. One of four modeled compounds, bisphenol A, was biodegraded in anoxic (oxygen free) environments. Only sediments collected nearest residential areas exhibited degradation of the synthetic birth control pharmaceutical, 17α-ethinylestradiol, possibly owing to adaptation and acclimation of the indigenous microbial community to septic discharge and the resultant selection of a microbial capability for biodegradation of 17α-ethinylestradiol.

Indiana↗

USGS1996

Small watershed studies: Analytical approaches for understanding ecosystem response to environmental change

Biogeochemical studies in small watersheds provide an analytical approach to understand how ecosystems respond to natural climatic variations and human-induced environmental change. Small watersheds, usually less than 5 km2, are small enough to permit characterization and understanding of ecosystem processes within relatively simple, homogeneous biological and physical settings; yet they are large enough to incorporate more complex processes and element cycles than can be studied at plot scales. Watersheds comprise discrete hydrochemical environments allowing quantification of hydrologic, element, and energy budgets. Element budgets, or mass balances, can be quantified as the difference between the mass of a solute that enters a watershed in wet and dry deposition and leaves a watershed in streamflow. Element budgets are primary tools used to investigate biogeochemical processes. Monitoring various aspects of element budgets to assess ecosystem health and stability is analogous to measuring the pulse or blood chemistry of a patient. Monitoring streamwater chemistry, basic climate, soil, and biotic variables provide a means to integrate complex biogeochemical processes and evaluate trends in water quality. Small watershed studies provide a scientific basis to develop predictive models of watershed function. Major emphases of small watershed studies include investigation of hydrologic and chemical responses to natural climate variation, anthropogenic stressors, and alternate forest-management practices. The nature and significance of biogeochemical research in small watersheds is reviewed by Moldan and Cerny (1994). The U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, and other federal agencies support several long-term small watershed studies to provide insight into a variety of ecosystem processes. Long-term records are essential to distinguish trends resulting from natural climatic variations or other stressors. The following sites, with noted periods of records, are examples of intensively studied forested watersheds in eastern USA supported by federal agencies: ■ Coweeta Hydrologic Laboratory, North Carolina, (1939-present), Swank and Crossley (1988). ■ Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest, New Hampshire, (1956-present), Bormann and Likens (1979). ■ Sleepers River Research Watershed, Vermont, (1958-present), Shanley et al. (1995). ■ Walker Branch Watershed, Tennessee, (1967-present), Johnson and Van Hook (1989). ■ Catoctin Mountains Research Site, Maryland, (1982-present), Rice and Bricker (1995). ■ Catskill Stream Network, New York, (1983- present), Murdoch and Stoddard (1992). ■ Panola Mountain Research Watershed, Georgia, (1985-present), Huntington et al. (1993). Small watershed studies also provide essential baseline information for understanding variations in water quality and element cycling in "pristine" ecosystems that can be used as benchmarks to evaluate anthropogenic impacts and alternate watershed management practices. This paper provides examples of how analytical tools developed through watershed research provide insight into ecosystem processes and can contribute to the management of watershed resources.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2011

Development of soil properties and nitrogen cycling in created wetlands

Mitigation wetlands are expected to compensate for the loss of structure and function of natural wetlands within 5–10 years of creation; however, the age-based trajectory of development in wetlands is unclear. This study investigates the development of coupled structural (soil properties) and functional (nitrogen cycling) attributes of created non-tidal freshwater wetlands of varying ages and natural reference wetlands to determine if created wetlands attain the water quality ecosystem service of nitrogen (N) cycling over time. Soil condition component and its constituents, gravimetric soil moisture, total organic carbon, and total N, generally increased and bulk density decreased with age of the created wetland. Nitrogen flux rates demonstrated age-related patterns, with younger created wetlands having lower rates of ammonification, nitrification, nitrogen mineralization, and denitrification potential than older created wetlands and natural reference wetlands. Results show a clear age-related trajectory in coupled soil condition and N cycle development, which is essential for water quality improvement. These findings can be used to enhance N processing in created wetlands and inform the regulatory evaluation of mitigation wetlands by identifying structural indicators of N processing performance.

Wetlands↗

USGS2012

Reducing Vulnerability of Ports and Harbors to Earthquake and Tsunami Hazards

Recent scientific research suggests the Pacific Northwest could experience catastrophic earthquakes in the near future, both from distant and local sources, posing a significant threat to coastal communities. Damage could result from numerous earthquake-related hazards, such as severe ground shaking, soil liquefaction, landslides, land subsidence/uplift, and tsunami inundation. Because of their geographic location, ports and harbors are especially vulnerable to these hazards. Ports and harbors, however, are important components of many coastal communities, supporting numerous activities critical to the local and regional economy and possibly serving as vital post-event, response-recovery transportation links. A collaborative, multi-year initiative is underway to increase the resiliency of Pacific Northwest ports and harbors to earthquake and tsunami hazards, involving Oregon Sea Grant (OSG), Washington Sea Grant (WSG), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coastal Services Center (CSC), and the U.S. Geological Survey Center for Science Policy (CSP). Specific products of this research, planning, and outreach initiative include a regional stakeholder issues and needs assessment, a community-based mitigation planning process, a Geographic Information System (GIS) — based vulnerability assessment methodology, an educational web-site and a regional data archive. This paper summarizes these efforts, including results of two pilot port-harbor community projects, one in Yaquina Bay, Oregon and the other in Sinclair Inlet, Washington. Finally, plans are outlined for outreach to other port and harbor communities in the Pacific Northwest and beyond, using "getting started" workshops and a web-based tutorial.

Oregon, Washington↗

USGS1998

Soil, environmental, and watershed measurements in support of carbon cycling studies in northwestern Mississippi

Measurements including soil respiration, soil moisture, soil temperature, and carbon export in suspended sediments from small watersheds were recorded at several field sites in northwestern Mississippi in support of hillslope process studies associated with the U.S. Geological Survey's Mississippi Basin Carbon Project (MBCP). These measurements were made to provide information about carbon cycling in agricultural and forest ecosystems to understand the potential role of erosion and deposition in the sequestration of soil organic carbon in upland soils. The question of whether soil erosion and burial constitutes an important net sink of atmospheric carbon dioxide is one hypothesis that the MBCP is evaluating to better understand carbon cycling and climate change. This report contains discussion of methods used and presents data for the period December 1996 through March 1998. Included in the report are ancillary data provided by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) ARS National Sedimentation Laboratory and U.S. Forest Service (USFS) Center for Bottomland Hardwoods Research on rainfall, runoff, sediment yield, forest biomass and grain yield. Together with the data collected by the USGS these data permit the construction of carbon budgets and the calibration of models of soil organic matter dynamics and sediment transport and deposition. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has established cooperative agreements with the USDA and USFS to facilitate collaborative research at research sites in northwestern Mississippi.

Mississippi↗

USGS2010

StreamStats in Oklahoma– Drainage-basin characteristics and peak-flow frequency statistics for ungaged streams

The USGS Streamflow Statistics (StreamStats) Program was created to make geographic information systems-based estimation of streamflow statistics easier, faster, and more consistent than previously used manual techniques. The StreamStats user interface is a map-based internet application that allows users to easily obtain streamflow statistics, basin characteristics, and other information for user-selected U.S. Geological Survey data-collection stations and ungaged sites of interest. The application relies on the data collected at U.S. Geological Survey streamflow-gaging stations, computer aided computations of drainage-basin characteristics, and published regression equations for several geographic regions comprising the United States. The StreamStats application interface allows the user to (1) obtain information on features in selected map layers, (2) delineate drainage basins for ungaged sites, (3) download drainage-basin polygons to a shapefile, (4) compute selected basin characteristics for delineated drainage basins, (5) estimate selected streamflow statistics for ungaged points on a stream, (6) print map views, (7) retrieve information for U.S. Geological Survey streamflow-gaging stations, and (8) get help on using StreamStats. StreamStats was designed for national application, with each state, territory, or group of states responsible for creating unique geospatial datasets and regression equations to compute selected streamflow statistics. With the cooperation of the Oklahoma Department of Transportation, StreamStats has been implemented for Oklahoma and is available at http://water.usgs.gov/osw/streamstats/. The Oklahoma StreamStats application covers 69 processed hydrologic units and most of the state of Oklahoma. Basin characteristics available for computation include contributing drainage area, contributing drainage area that is unregulated by Natural Resources Conservation Service floodwater retarding structures, mean-annual precipitation at the drainage-basin outlet for the period 1961-1990, 10-85 channel slope (slope between points located at 10 percent and 85 percent of the longest flow-path length upstream from the outlet), and percent impervious area. The Oklahoma StreamStats application interacts with the National Streamflow Statistics database, which contains the peak-flow regression equations in a previously published report. Fourteen peak-flow (flood) frequency statistics are available for computation in the Oklahoma StreamStats application. These statistics include the peak flow at 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, 100-, and 500-year recurrence intervals for rural, unregulated streams; and the peak flow at 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, 100-, and 500-year recurrence intervals for rural streams that are regulated by Natural Resources Conservation Service floodwater retarding structures. Basin characteristics and streamflow statistics cannot be computed for locations in playa basins (mostly in the Oklahoma Panhandle) and along main stems of the largest river systems in the state, namely the Arkansas, Canadian, Cimarron, Neosho, Red, and Verdigris Rivers, because parts of the drainage areas extend outside of the processed hydrologic units.

Oklahoma↗

USGS1978

Hydrologic Unit Map-1978, state of South Dakota

This map and accompanying table show Hydrologic Unites that are basically hydrographic in nature. The Cataloging Unites shown supplant the Cataloging Units previously depicted n the 1974 State Hydrologic Unit Map. The boundaries as shown have been adapted from the 1974 State Hydrologic Unit Map, "The Catalog of Information on Water Data" (1972), "Water Resources Regions and Subregions for the National Assessment of Water and Related Land Resources" by the U.S. Water Resources Council (1970), "River Basin of the United States" by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service (1963, 1970), "River Basin Maps Showing Hydrologic Stations" by the Inter-Agency Committee on Water Resources, Subcommittee on Hydrology (1961), and State planning maps. The Political Subdivision has been adopted from "Counties and County Equivalents of the States if the United States" presented in Federal Information Processing Standards Publication 6-2, issued by the National Bureau of Standards (1973) in which each county or county equivalent is identified by a 2-character State code and a 3-character county code. The Regions, Subregions and Accounting Units are aggregates of the Cataloging Unites. The Regions and Sub regions are currently (1978) used by the U.S> Water Resources Council for comprehensive planning, including the National Assessment, and as a standard geographical framework for more detailed water and related land-resources planning. The Accounting Units are those currently (1978) in use by the U.S. Geological Survey for managing the National Water Data Network. This map was revised to include a boundary realinement between Cataloging Units 10140103 and 10160009.

South Dakota↗

USGS2017

The Wetland and Aquatic Research Center strategic science plan

Introduction The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Wetland and Aquatic Research Center (WARC) has two primary locations (Gainesville, Florida, and Lafayette, Louisiana) and field stations throughout the southeastern United States and Caribbean. WARC’s roots are in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Park Service research units that were brought into the USGS as the Biological Research Division in 1996. Founded in 2015, WARC was created from the merger of two long-standing USGS biology science Centers—the Southeast Ecological Science Center and the National Wetlands Research Center—to bring together expertise in biology, ecology, landscape science, geospatial applications, and decision support in order to address issues nationally and internationally. WARC scientists apply their expertise to a variety of wetland and aquatic research and monitoring issues that require coordinated, integrated efforts to better understand natural environments. By increasing basic understanding of the biology of important species and broader ecological and physiological processes, this research provides information to policymakers and aids managers in their stewardship of natural resources and in regulatory functions. This strategic science plan (SSP) was developed to guide WARC research during the next 5–10 years in support of Department of the Interior (DOI) partnering bureaus such as the USFWS, the National Park Service, and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, as well as other Federal, State, and local natural resource management agencies. The SSP demonstrates the alignment of the WARC goals with the USGS mission areas, associated programs, and other DOI initiatives. The SSP is necessary for workforce planning and, as such, will be used as a guide for future needs for personnel. The SSP also will be instrumental in developing internal funding priorities and in promoting WARC’s capabilities to both external cooperators and other groups within the USGS.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2026

Flood-inundation maps of the Blue River and major tributaries in and near Kansas City, Missouri, 2023–25

Digital flood-inundation maps for 35.5 miles of the Blue River, in and near Kansas City, Missouri, were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the City of Kansas City. Maps were also developed for a combined 7.3 miles of Brush Creek (4.4 miles) and Indian Creek (2.9 miles), two primary tributaries to the Blue River in the study reach. The flood-inundation maps, available through the USGS Flood Inundation Mapping Program website at https://water.usgs.gov/osw/flood_inundation/ , depict estimates of the areal extent and depth of flooding, depth of water above first-floor elevations in selected buildings, water velocity, water-surface elevations, and time of travel corresponding to selected water levels or gage heights (hereafter referred to as “stages”) at nine reference USGS streamgages—five on the Blue River (USGS station numbers 06893590, 06893578, 06893500, 06893150, and 06893100), two on Brush Creek (USGS station numbers 06893562 and 06893557), one on Indian Creek (USGS station number 06893390), and one on the Missouri River (USGS station number 06893000). Near-real-time stages at these streamgages may be obtained from USGS Water Data for the Nation at https://doi.org/10.5066/F7P55KJN or the National Weather Service National Water Prediction Service at http://water.noaa.gov/ , which also forecasts flood hydrographs at seven of these sites (USGS station numbers 06893000, 06893590, 06893578, 06893500, 06893150, 06893557, and 06893390). Flood profiles were computed for eight map reaches by means of two-dimensional hydraulic models. The models were calibrated using the USGS-developed stage–streamflow relations at each reference streamgage. Two map reaches on the lower Blue River also include the effects of backwater from the Missouri River on flood inundation extent and hydraulic characteristics. The hydraulic models were used to compute water-surface profiles for flood stages at 1-foot intervals referenced to the streamgage datums. The profile stages ranged from the National Weather Service “Action Stage” or near bankfull to a stage exceeding the highest recorded water level at each streamgage. The simulated water-surface profiles were then combined with a digital elevation model (derived from light detection and ranging data having a nonvegetated vertical accuracy of a maximum 10-centimeter root-mean-square error) to delineate the area flooded at each water level and the associated hydraulic characteristics. The availability of these maps, along with information regarding current stage from the USGS streamgage and forecasted high-flow stages from the National Weather Service, will provide emergency management personnel, resource managers, and residents with information that could be critical for flood-response activities such as evacuations and road closures, as well as for postflood recovery efforts.

Kansas, Missouri↗

USGS2004

The flora of the Cottonwood Lake Study Area, Stutsman County, North Dakota

The 92 ha Cottonwood Lake Study Area is located in south-central North Dakota along the eastern edge of a glacial stagnation moraine known as the Missouri Coteau. The study area has been the focus of biologic and hydrologic research since the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service purchased the site in 1963. We studied the plant communities of the Cottonwood Lake Study Area from 1992 to 2001. During this time period, the vascular flora of the study area consisted of 220 species representing 51 families. Over half of the species were perennial forbs (117 species). Perennial grasses (26 species) and annual forbs (22 species) made up the next two largest physiognomic groupings. The flora, having a mean Coefficient of Conservatism of 4.6 and a Floristic Quality Index of 62, consisted of 187 native species. Thirty-three species were non-natives. Our annotated list should provide information useful to researchers, graduate students, and others as they design and implement future studies in wetlands and uplands both in and around the Cottonwood Lake Study Area.

Prairie Naturalist↗

USGS1993

Habitat suitability index model for brook trout in streams of the Southern Blue Ridge Province: Surrogate variables, model evaluation, and suggested improvements

Data from several sources were collated and analyzed by correlation, regression, and principal components analysis to define surrrogate variables for use in the brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) habitat suitability index (HSI) model, and to evaluate the applicability of the model for assessing habitat in high elevation streams of the southern Blue Ridge Province (SBRP). In all data sets examined, pH and alkalinity were highly correlated, and both declined with increasing elevation; however, the magnitude of the decline varied with underlying rock formations and other factors, thereby restricting the utility of elevation as a surrogate for pH. In the data sets that contained biological information, brook trout abundance (as biomass, density, or both) tended to increase with elevation and decrease with the abundance of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), and was not significantly correlated (P >0.05) with the abundance of most benthic macroinvertebrate taxa normally construed as important in the diet of brook trout. Using multiple linear regression, the authors formulated an alternative HSI model A? based on point estimates of gradient, pH, elevation, stream width, and rainbow trout density A? which explained 40 to 50 percent of the variance in brook trout density in 256 stream reaches. Although logically developed, the present U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service HSI model, proposed in 1982, seems deficient in several areas, especially when applied to SBRP streams. The authors recommend that the water quality component in the model be updated and reevaluated, focusing on the differential sensitivities of each life stage, the stochastic nature of the water quality variables, and the possible existence of habitat requirements that differ among brook trout strains.

Biological Report↗

USGS2008

Examining differences between recovered and declining endangered species

Between 1973 and 1999, 43 species in the United States were reclassified from endangered to threatened or removed entirely from the Endangered Species List. Of these, 23 were identified as recovered. In 1999 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ( USFWS) published a list of 33 additional species for possible reclassification and/or delisting. We initiated this study to examine why some endangered species recover but others continue to decline and to identify differences in management activities between these two groups. We defined recovered/recovering species as previously recovered species and the additional recovered/recovering species listed by the USFWS. We defined declining species as those identified as declining in the most recent USFWS Report to Congress. Information on recovered/recovering and declining species was gathered from relevant literature, recovery plans, U.S. Federal Register documents, and individuals responsible for the recovery management of each species. We used this information to examine (1) the percentage of current and historic range covered by management activities; (2) threats affecting the species; (3) population sizes at the time of listing; (4) current versus historic range size; and (5) percentage of recovery management objectives completed. Although few statistical analyses provided significant results, those that did suggest the following differences between recovered/recovering and declining species: (1) recovered/recovering species face threats that are easier to address; (2) recovered/recovering species occupy a greater percentage of their historic range; and (3) recovered/recovering species have a greater percentage of their recovery management objectives completed. Those species with threats easier to address and that occupy a greater percentage of their historic range are recovered/recovering. In contrast, declining species face threats more difficult to address and occupy significantly less of their historic range. If this remains true, future species recovery may require more time and resources.

Conservation Biology↗