Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Research and Development 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 847 records · Page 47Linked to original sources
USGS2006

Reserve Growth in Oil Fields of West Siberian Basin, Russia

Although reserve (or field) growth has proven to be an important factor contributing to new reserves in mature petroleum basins, it is still a poorly understood phenomenon. Limited studies show that the magnitude of reserve growth is controlled by several major factors, including (1) the reserve booking and reporting requirements in each country, (2) improvements in reservoir characterization and simulation, (3) application of enhanced oil recovery techniques, and (4) the discovery of new and extensions of known pools in discovered fields. Various combinations of these factors can affect the estimates of proven reserves in particular fields and may dictate repeated estimations of reserves during a field's life. This study explores the reserve growth in the 42 largest oil fields in the West Siberian Basin, which contain about 55 percent of the basin's total oil reserves. The West Siberian Basin occupies a vast swampy plain between the Ural Mountains and the Yenisey River, and extends offshore into the Kara Sea; it is the richest petroleum province in Russia. About 600 oil and gas fields with original reserves of 144 billion barrels of oil (BBO) and more than 1,200 trillion cubic feet of gas (TCFG) have been discovered. The principal oil reserves and most of the oil fields are in the southern half of the basin, whereas the northern half contains mainly gas reserves. Sedimentary strata in the basin consist of Upper Triassic through Tertiary clastic rocks. Most oil is produced from Neocomian (Lower Cretaceous) marine to deltaic sandstone reservoirs, although substantial oil reserves are also in the marine Upper Jurassic and continental to paralic Lower to Middle Jurassic sequences. The majority of oil fields are in structural traps, which are gentle, platform-type anticlines with closures ranging from several tens of meters to as much as 150 meters (490 feet). Fields producing from stratigraphic traps are generally smaller except for the giant Talin field which contains oil in Jurassic river-valley sandstones. Principal source rocks are organic-rich marine shales of the Volgian (uppermost Jurassic) Bazhenov Formation, which is 30-50 m (98- 164 feet) thick. Bazhenov-derived oils are mostly of medium gravity, and contain 0.8-1.3 percent sulfur and 2-5 percent paraffin. Oils in the Lower to Middle Jurassic clastics were sourced from lacustrine and estuarine shales of the Toarcian Togur Bed. These oils are medium to low gravity, with low sulfur (less than 0.25 percent) and high paraffin (commonly to 10 percent) contents. Among the 42 fields analyzed for reserve growth, 30 fields are located in the Middle Ob region, which includes the Samotlor field with reserves of more than 25 BBO and the Fedorov field with reserves of about 5 BBO. Data used in the study include year of discovery, year of first production, annual and cumulative production, and remaining reserves reported by Russian reserve categories (A+B+C1 and C2) in January of each year. Correlation of these Russian resource categories to U.S. categories of the Society of Petroleum Engineers classification is complex and somewhat uncertain. Reserve growth in oil fields of West Siberia was calculated using a newly developed Group Growth method, which requires that the total reserve (proven reserve plus cumulative production) of individual fields with an equal length of reserve record be added together starting with discovery year or the first production year. Then the annual growth factor (AGF), which is the ratio of total reserves of two consecutive years, is calculated for all years. Once AGFs have been calculated, the cumulative growth factor (CGF) is calculated by multiplying the AGFs of all the previous years. The CGF data are used to develop reserve growth models. The West Siberian oil fields show a 13-fold reserve growth 20 years after the discovery year and only about a 2-fold growth after the first production year. This difference is attributed to extensive exploration and field delineation activities between the discovery and the first production years. Because of uncertainty in the length of evaluation time and in reported reserves during this initial period, reserve growth based on the first production year is more reliable for model development. However, reserve growth models based both on discovery year and first production year show rapid growth in the first few years and slower growth in the following years. In contrast, the reserve growth patterns for the conterminous United States and offshore Gulf of Mexico show a steady reserve increase throughout the productive lives of the fields. The different reserve booking requirements and the lack of capital investment for improved reservoir management and production technologies in West Siberian fields relative to U.S. fields are the probable causes for the difference in growth patterns. Reserve growth models based on the first production year predict that the reserve growth potential in the 42 largest oil fields of West Siberia over a five-year period (1998-2003) ranges from 270-330 million barrels or 0.34-0.42 percent per year. For a similar five-year period (1996-2001), models for the conterminous United States predict a growth of 0.54-0.75 percent per year. This abstract presents the contents of a poster prepared for the AAPG Hedberg Research Conference on Understanding World Oil Resources, November 12-17, 2006 - Colorado Springs, Colorado. A paper 'Reserve Growth in Oil Fields of West Siberian Basin, Russia' was published in Natural Resources Research, v. 12, no. 2, June, 2003.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2005

Naturally Occurring Arsenic in Ground Water, Norman, Oklahoma, 2004, and Remediation Options for Produced Water

In 2000, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reviewed the arsenic drinking water standard for public water supplies. Considering the available research and statistics on the health effects of arsenic ingestion, the EPA reduced the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for public drinking water from 50 micrograms per liter (?g/L) to 10 ?g/L (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2001a). As a result of the more stringent standard, the EPA estimates that about 3,000 public water providers across the United States must take action to meet the new standard before it becomes effective on January 23, 2006 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2001b). The City of Norman (City) is one of several Oklahoma municipalities affected by the new arsenic standard. About 20 percent of Norman?s water is supplied by wells completed in the Central Oklahoma (Garber-Wellington) aquifer; the rest is supplied by Lake Thunderbird (fig. 1) or purchased from Oklahoma City. The Norman well field is composed of 24 active wells, and water produced from about half of the wells will not be in compliance with the new MCL (figs. 2 and 3). Chemical treatment of water with elevated arsenic is possible, but it is generally cost prohibitive. Another costly solution is simply to abandon the high-arsenic wells and replace them with new wells in low-arsenic areas. In the next phase of well construction beginning in 2005, the City plans to construct as many as 30 new wells in northeast Norman (Bryan Mitchell, City of Norman, oral commun., 2005). The new wells will replace production lost to the new arsenic standard and add new production to keep pace with rapidly growing consumer demand. Well modification to exclude arsenic-bearing water from existing wells is a more cost-effective solution, but it requires a great deal of knowledge about local aquifer properties and individual well dynamics to decide which wells are good candidates for modification. With the goal of determining if well modification can be used to bring some of Norman?s high-arsenic wells into compliance with the new arsenic standard, the EPA Office of Research and Development (ORD) initiated a three-year research project in 2003 with participation from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Oklahoma State University, and the City of Norman. The primary objectives of the project are to: (1) determine where naturally occurring arsenic is entering wells by collecting water samples at different depths, (2) investigate the utility of new methods for collecting water-quality data in a pumping well, (3) better understand the stratigraphy and composition of aquifer rocks, (4) assess 10 wells for the possibility of arsenic remediation by well modification, and (5) evaluate the effectiveness of well modification in bringing marginal wells into compliance with the new arsenic MCL. The purpose of this report is to describe the occurrence of arsenic in ground water near Norman, Oklahoma, and available options for reducing arsenic concentrations in produced ground water.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2022

Seasonal and long-term clarity trend assessment of Lake Tahoe, California–Nevada

The clarity of Lake Tahoe, observed using a Secchi disk on a regular basis since the late 1960s, continues to be a sentinel metric of lake health. Water clarity is influenced by physical and biological processes and has declined in the five decades of monitoring, revealing differences between summer (June–September) and winter (December–March). This document summarizes key findings of a study of Lake Tahoe water clarity, including long-term variability and the relative importance of several influencing variables and processes. This study, prepared in cooperation with the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, focused on (1) an apparent divergence in clarity trends between summer and winter periods, (2) observed changes in in-lake physical and ecological variables that may influence or control seasonal and annual clarity trends, and (3) five research hypotheses regarding lake clarity that were developed by Lake Tahoe management agencies. Previously collected data were used to complete this study. Trend analysis confirmed that winter clarity stabilized (that is, there is no longer a statistically significant trend up or down) during the last 20 years. Evaluation of clarity for selected months in the 50-year Secchi disk clarity dataset showed that only two summer months, July and August, had statistically significant decreases in clarity from 2000–19. Different subsets of available data were analyzed to reveal the presence or absences of trends for each season, decade, and month. Five hypotheses related to lake clarity were part of the study described by this report. Hypothesis 1 stated that clarity is controlled predominantly by the distribution and volumetric density of fine particles in suspension. This hypothesis was studied using available data describing in-lake fine (0–20 micrometers) particles from 2008–19. Water clarity was negatively correlated with in-lake particle abundance, with particles in the 1.0-4.6 μm range having the greatest effect, consistent with light-scattering theory. Estimated abundances of diatoms of the genus Cyclotella also were found to be negatively correlated with clarity. Data limitations precluded a complete investigation of hypothesis 2, which stated that the observed improvements in winter water clarity are a response to decreasing fine suspended-sediment concentrations in the lake resulting from load reductions from upland sources in and near urbanized areas. Data describing fine-sediment loading from urban areas to the lake were only available since 2014, and only once or twice per month. A slight, statistically significant, negative correlation was identified between urban fine-particle loading and monthly lake clarity with a 4-month lag. Particle abundance in monitored streams is highly correlated with simultaneous particle abundance in the lake. Hypothesis 3 stated that changing hydrodynamic conditions in the lake are increasing thermal stability and resistance to mixing. Trend analyses performed on stability index and buoyancy frequency time series computed from long-term observations of lake temperatures support the hypothesis that hydrodynamic conditions have evolved since 1969 to increase the lake’s resistance to mixing. The date of maximum mixing in winter has become progressively earlier in the year. Lake density stratification, defined using the stability index, is commencing earlier in the year and extending a month longer than in the early years of the monitoring program. Hypothesis 4 stated that the trend of decreasing summer clarity is a result of earlier, prolonged, and more intense stratification. Statistically significant correlations were found between summer clarity and (1) date of onset of stratification, (2) duration of stratification, and (3) buoyancy frequency. Hypothesis 5 stated that ecological (food web) interactions are causing changes in the trends of seasonal or annual clarity; data supporting hypothesis 5 were limited to examples from other systems and to intermittent monitoring of Lake Tahoe and Emerald Bay. The resulting narrative assessment was motivated by a 6-year study of Mysis shrimp disappearance and return in Emerald Bay. The available data and a large body of published literature are consistent with the inference that Mysis shrimp-induced food web changes are causing changes in the trends of seasonal or annual clarity. This food-web study focused on the relations between introduced Mysis shrimp, the native cladocerans ( Daphnia and Bosmina ) that were largely eliminated following Mysis introduction, and the effect on fine particles within the lake. The records of Mysis and other zooplankton data for Lake Tahoe are episodic and have large gaps. Consequently, statistical analyses could not be conducted to compare zooplankton data with other variables. The long-term record, however, indicates that the key effect was a change to the phytoplankton assemblage, where larger diatoms disappeared, likely due to Mysis grazing, only to be replaced by Cyclotella that are an order-of-magnitude smaller and have increased the abundance and volumetric density of total fine particles in suspension (biotic and abiotic).

California↗
USGS2010

Pennsylvania StreamStats: A web-based application for obtaining water-resource-related information

StreamStats is a national web-based Geographic Information System (GIS) application, developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc., to provide a variety of water-resource-related information. Users can easily obtain descriptive information, basin characteristics, and streamflow statistics for USGS streamgages and ungaged stream locations throughout Pennsylvania. StreamStats also allows users to search upstream and (or) downstream from user-selected points to identify locations of and obtain information for water-resource-related activities, such as dams and streamgages.

Pennsylvania↗
USGS2011

U.S. Geological Survey Community for Data Integration-NWIS Web Services Snapshot Tool for ArcGIS

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) data resources are so vast that many scientists are unaware of data holdings that may be directly relevant to their research. Data are also difficult to access and large corporate databases, such as the National Water Information System (NWIS) that houses hydrologic data for the Nation, are challenging to use without considerable expertise and investment of time. The USGS Community for Data Integration (CDI) was established in 2009 to address data and information management issues affecting the proficiency of earth science research. A CDI workshop convened in 2009 identified common data integration needs of USGS scientists and targeted high value opportunities that might address these needs by leveraging existing projects in USGS science centers, in-kind contributions, and supplemental funding. To implement this strategy, CDI sponsored a software development project in 2010 to facilitate access and use of NWIS data with ArcGIS, a widely used Geographic Information System. The resulting software product, the NWIS Web Services Snapshot Tool for ArcGIS, is presented here.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2019

Invasive species research—Science for detection, containment, and control

Invasive species research within the U.S. Geological Survey’s Ecosystems Mission Area focuses on invasive organisms throughout the United States. U.S. Geological Survey scientists work with partners in the Department of the Interior, other Federal, State and Territorial agencies, Tribes, industry, and agriculture to provide the information needed to help solve problems posed by these invaders. Key components of U.S. Geological Survey invasive species science include the development of novel prevention, prediction, early detection, containment, and control tools.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2007

EAARL submarine topography: Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary

This Web site contains 46 Lidar-derived submarine topography maps and GIS files for the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. These Lidar-derived submarine topographic maps were produced as a collaborative effort between the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Coastal and Marine Geology Program, FISC St. Petersburg, Florida, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Remote Sensing Division, the National Park Service (NPS) South Florida/Caribbean Network Inventory and Monitoring Program, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Wallops Flight Facility. One objective of this research is to create techniques to survey coral reefs and barrier islands for the purposes of geomorphic change studies, habitat mapping, ecological monitoring, change detection, and event assessment. As part of this project, data from an innovative instrument under development at the NASA Wallops Flight Facility, the NASA Experimental Airborne Advanced Research Lidar (EAARL) are being used. This sensor has the potential to make significant contributions in this realm for measuring subaerial and submarine topography within cross-environment surveys. High spectral resolution, water-column correction, and low costs were found to be key factors in providing accurate and affordable imagery to coastal resource managers.

Florida↗
USGS2019

Visualizing populations of North American sea ducks: Maps to guide research and management planning

North American sea ducks generally breed in mid- to northern-latitude regions and nearly all rely upon marine habitats for much of their annual cycle. Most sea duck species remained poorly studied until the 1990s when declines were noted in several species and populations. Subsequent research, much of which was funded by the Sea Duck Joint Venture, began in the late 1990s with an emphasis on defining use areas throughout the annual cycle, migration patterns, and determining if there were distinct populations, within species, across North America. These studies relied largely upon satellite telemetry information to identify winter, breeding, and molting areas of sea ducks. New information from band recovery and genetic markers was added, contributing to hypotheses and initial conclusions about population delineation. Information on population units across North America is critical for identifying appropriate scales for evaluating population status and trends through annual monitoring surveys, harvest assessments, habitat protection and measuring effectiveness of management applications. Previous descriptions of population segments were for single species or smaller groups of similar species. Here, we summarize current knowledge on the general distribution and population segments of 13 species of sea ducks in North America by comparing range maps to long-term band recovery, genetic, and satellite telemetry data to inform population delineation assessments and future research. These comparisons show a high degree of consistency in population patterns for most species across the independent data types. These maps provide a foundation for developing new hypothesis-driven research to address remaining knowledge gaps and questions about population differentiation, annual cycle distribution, habitat use, and harvest assessment.

North America↗
USGS1985

Water-resources activities of the U.S. Geological Survey in Texas; fiscal years 1982-84

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) was established by an act of Congress on March 3, 1879, to provide a permanent Federal agency to conduct the systematic and scientific classification of the public lands, and examination of the geological structure, mineral resources, and products of national domain. An integral part of that original mission includes publishing and disseminating the earth-science information needed to understand, to plan the use of, and to manage the Nation's energy, land, mineral, and water resources. Since 1879, the research and fact-finding role of the USGS has grown and been modified to meet the changing needs of the Nation it serves. As part of that evolution, the USGS has become the Federal Government's largest earth-science research agency, the Nation's largest civilian mapmaking agency, the primary source of data on the Nation's surface- and ground-water resources, and the employer of the largest number of professional earth scientists. Today's programs serve a diversity of needs and users. Programs include: Conducting detailed assessments of the energy and mineral potential of the Nation's land and offshore areas. Investigating and issuing warnings of earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, landslides, and other geologic and hydrologic hazards. Conducting research on the geologic structure of the Nation. Studying the geologic features, structure, processes, and history of the other planets of our solar system. Conducting topographic surveys of the Nation and preparing topographic and thematic maps and related cartographic products. Developing and producing digital cartographic data bases and products. Collecting data on a routine basis to determine the quantity, quality, and use of surface and ground water. Conducting water-resources appraisals in order to describe the consequences of alternative plans for developing land and water resources. Conducting research in hydraulics and hydrology and coordinating all Federal water-data acquisition. Using remotely sensed data to develop new cartographic, geologic, and hydrologic research techniques for natural resources planning and management. Providing earth-science information through an extensive publications program and a network of public access points. Along with its continuing commitment to meet the growing and changing earthscience information needs of the Nation, the USGS remains dedicated to its original mission to collect, analyze, interpret, publish, and disseminate information about the natural resources of the Nation providing "earth science in the public service."

Open-File Report↗
USGS2017

2010-2015 Juvenile fish ecology in the Nisqually River Delta and Nisqually Reach Aquatic Reserve

The return of tidal inundation to over 750 acres of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge (NNWR) in fall of 2009 was the crowning moment in the effort to protect and restore the Nisqually Delta. The Nisqually NWR project complemented three earlier restoration projects completed by the Nisqually Indian Tribe (Tribe) on tribal property to restore over 900 acres of the estuary, representing the largest estuary restoration project in the Pacific Northwest and one of the most significant advances to date towards the recovery of Puget Sound (USFWS 2005). In 2011 the Washington Department of Natural Resources (WADNR established the over 14000 acre Nisqually Reach Aquatic Reserve (Reserve), complementing the protection and restoration successes in the Nisqually Delta. The Reserve includes all state-owned aquatic lands around Anderson, Ketron and Eagle islands and part of McNeil Island (Figure 1, WDNR 2011). The Reserve also includes a diverse assemblage of nearshore and offshore habitats important to resident and migratory fish including federal endangered species act listed fish like Chinook salmon (Oncorynchus tshawytscha) and steelhead (O. mykiss). Studies in the Nisqually Estuary (Ellings and Hodgson 2007, David et al. 2014, Ellings et al. 2016) and South Puget Sound (Duffy 2003) have summarized fish use of the area. However, the fish ecology of the reserve had not been systematically surveyed. The Tribe, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), NNWR, Nisqually River Foundation (NRF), and others are currently conducting a multi-year, interdisciplinary, hypothesis-based research and monitoring study investigating the impact of delta restoration on estuarine processes, habitat structures, and functions. Our interdisciplinary monitoring framework enables us to link key estuarine processes with habitat development and biological response at multiple scales across the restored footprint, reference marshes, and throughout the Nisqually Reach. Key research components include hydrology and sediment regime, channel and marsh topography and development, vegetation colonization, and invertebrate, bird, and fish abundance, habitat use, and foraging ecology. After the Reserve was established, the WDNR and the research partnership led by the Tribe expanded the existing delta fish ecology assessment to include sampling stations throughout the Reserve. The results of the Reserve fish ecology assessment provide a unique regional analysis of fish ecology from the Nisqually River to McNeil Island.

Salmon Recovery Program Technical Report↗
USGS2020

Final project memorandum: Southeast Climate Adaptation Science Center Project

Low-lying public lands along the northern Gulf of Mexico coast are vulnerable to sea-level rise. Coastal planners and resource managers in the region have requested customized information that can be used to concisely communicate local sea-level rise scenarios and identify potential impacts to the missions of management agencies. In this project, researchers worked with the Northern Gulf of Mexico Sentinel Site Cooperative to develop information sheets outlining potential sea-level rise scenarios for the region through 2100 including their potential impact on the missions of federally-managed lands. Researchers drew from existing information on regional and global sea-level rise scenarios to develop customized information sheets for 54 federally-managed lands in the region (e.g., National Wildlife Refuges, National Park Service lands, National Estuarine Research Reserves) (Chivoiu et al. 2020). This project was developed in response to a request for customized sea-level rise scenario products from partners at the Northern Gulf of Mexico Sentinel Site Cooperative and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Gulf Restoration Program. The results of this project support the conservation stewardship missions of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Park Service by providing science to inform management of their lands along the Gulf of Mexico.

Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas↗
USGS2009

Vegetation classification and distribution mapping report: Mesa Verde National Park

The classification and distribution mapping of the vegetation of Mesa Verde National Park (MEVE) and surrounding environment was achieved through a multi-agency effort between 2004 and 2007. The National Park Service’s Southern Colorado Plateau Network facilitated the team that conducted the work, which comprised the U.S. Geological Survey’s Southwest Biological Science Center, Fort Collins Research Center, and Rocky Mountain Geographic Science Center; Northern Arizona University; Prescott College; and NatureServe. The project team described 47 plant communities for MEVE, 34 of which were described from quantitative classification based on f eld-relevé data collected in 1993 and 2004. The team derived 13 additional plant communities from field observations during the photointerpretation phase of the project. The National Vegetation Classification Standard served as a framework for classifying these plant communities to the alliance and association level. Eleven of the 47 plant communities were classified as “park specials;” that is, plant communities with insufficient data to describe them as new alliances or associations. The project team also developed a spatial vegetation map database representing MEVE, with three different map-class schemas: base, group, and management map classes. The base map classes represent the fi nest level of spatial detail. Initial polygons were developed using Definiens Professional (at the time of our use, this software was called eCognition), assisted by interpretation of 1:12,000 true-color digital orthophoto quarter quadrangles (DOQQs). These polygons (base map classes) were labeled using manual photo interpretation of the DOQQs and 1:12,000 true-color aerial photography. Field visits verified interpretation concepts. The vegetation map database includes 46 base map classes, which consist of associations, alliances, and park specials classified with quantitative analysis, additional associations and park specials noted during photointerpretation, and non-vegetated land cover, such as infrastructure, land use, and geological land cover. The base map classes consist of 5,007 polygons in the project area. A field-based accuracy assessment of the base map classes showed overall accuracy to be 43.5%. Seven map classes comprise 89.1% of the park vegetated land cover. The group map classes represent aggregations of the base map classes, approximating the group level of the National Vegetation Classification Standard, version 2 (Federal Geographic Data Committee 2007), and reflecting physiognomy and floristics. Terrestrial ecological systems, as described by NatureServe (Comer et al. 2003), were used as the fi rst approximation of the group level. The project team identified 14 group map classes for this project. The overall accuracy of the group map classes was determined using the same accuracy assessment data as for the base map classes. The overall accuracy of the group representation of vegetation was 80.3%. In consultation with park staff , the team developed management map classes, consisting of park-defined groupings of base map classes intended to represent a balance between maintaining required accuracy and providing a focus on vegetation of particular interest or import to park managers. The 23 management map classes had an overall accuracy of 73.3%. While the main products of this project are the vegetation classification and the vegetation map database, a number of ancillary digital geographic information system and database products were also produced that can be used independently or to augment the main products. These products include shapefiles of the locations of field-collected data and relational databases of field-collected data.

Mesa Verde National Park↗
USGS2013

A natural resource condition assessment for Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks: Appendix 14: plants of conservation concern

Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks are located in the California Floristic Province, which has been named one of world‘s hotspots of endemic biodiversity (Myers et al. 2000). The California Floristic Province is the largest and most important geographic floristic unit in California and extends from the Klamath Mountains of southwestern Oregon to the northwestern portion of Baja California (Hickman 1993). The Sierra Nevada, one of six regions that make up the California Floristic Province, covers nearly 20% of the land in California yet contains over 50% of its flora. Within the Sierra Nevada, the southern Sierra supports more Sierran endemic and rare plant taxa than the central and northern portions of the region (Shevock 1996). Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks (SEKI) encompass roughly 20% of the southern Sierra Nevada region. The parks overlap three floristic subregions (central Sierra Nevada High, southern Sierra Nevada High, and southern Sierra Nevada Foothills), and border the Great Basin Floristic Province. The parks support a rich and diverse vascular flora composed of over 1,560 taxa. Of these, 150 taxa are identified as having special status. The term special status is applied here to include taxa that are state or federally listed, rare in California, or at risk because they have a limited distribution. Only one species from these parks is listed under the state or federal Endangered Species Acts ( Carex tompkinsii , Tompkins‘ sedge, is listed as a rare species under the California Endangered Species Act), and one species is under review for federal endangered listing ( Pinus albicaulis , whitebark pine). However, an absence of threatened and endangered species recognized by Endangered Species Acts is not equivalent to an absence of species at risk. There are 83 plant taxa documented as occurring in SEKI that are considered imperiled or vulnerable in the state by the California Department of Fish and Game‘s California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB 2010a). There are an additional 66 taxa not formally listed by CNDDB that are recognized as having special status because their distribution is restricted to the Sierra Nevada. Special status plants are distributed throughout the two parks and inhabit a wide range of environments along the length of the elevation gradient that characterizes these parks. Ideally, we would assess the condition (status and trends) of each of the taxa on the SEKI special status plant list, documenting current population sizes, demographic rates and demographic trends. We would also hope to quantify the effects of individual stressors on each species based on existing monitoring and research. However, no data are available for most of the species on the special status plant list. For those few species (12 herbaceous species and two tree species) for which we possess some change over time information, the data are not adequate to make a competent assessment. Note that we have not explored the tree demographic information in any detail, as is covered in the NRCA Intact Forest/Five Needle Pines and Sequoia chapters. In general, we are unable to present an ‗integrity‘ metric for special status species in the parks, since the data to quantify the condition of each species in such a manner is not available. In contrast, the park does possess substantial data describing biodiversity in the parks. Therefore, our analysis focuses on describing the distribution and rarity of special status plants within the parks, with a particular focus on assessing the spatial distribution of species richness. We hope that such information will prove useful to park managers in determining which areas in the parks merit the most attention (for example in developing monitoring protocols). We also assess potential vulnerability of special status species to the stressors chosen by the NRCA working group, using both park data and available literature. As a first step, we spent considerable effort updating and refining the criteria for the special status plant list, as this list defines which taxa are considered in our assessment. Observation data of these species was then compiled from all known sources in order to provide a comprehensive view of where special status plants have been documented and, ultimately, to enable the most informed determinations of areas in the parks that potentially support the highest number of rare and endemic taxa. These ‗hot spot‘ analyses are presented by geographic region, vegetation type and elevation. For these and other analyses presented in this report, we place more focus on summarizing findings for the herbaceous and shrub special status taxa than on special status trees. The trees which qualify as special status are the focus of other NRCA chapters, including Giant Sequoia and Intact Forests/Five-needle Pines. We do, however, present their mapped distributions and provide overviews of research related to the special status tree taxa in the Stressors section of this report.

California↗
USGS2020

Using information from global climate models to inform policymaking—The role of the U.S. Geological Survey

This report provides an overview of model-based climate science in a risk management context. In addition, it summarizes how the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) will continue to follow best scientific practices and when and how the results of this research will be delivered to the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) and other stakeholders to inform policymaking. Climate change is a risk management challenge for society because of the uncertain consequences for natural and human systems across decades to centuries. Climate-related science activities within the USGS emphasize research on adaptation to climate change. This research helps inform adaptive management processes and planning activities within other DOI bureaus and by DOI stakeholders. Global climate models are sophisticated numerical representations of the Earth’s climate system. Research groups from around the world regularly participate in a coordinated effort to produce a suite of climate models. This global effort provides a test bed to assess model performance and analyze projections of future change under various prescribed climate scenarios. These climate scenarios describe a plausible future outcome associated with a specific set of societal actions. Because scenarios are developed in a risk-based framework with a high degree of uncertainty about future societal developments, they are usually not assigned a formal likelihood of occurrence. Examining a range of projected climate outcomes based on multiple scenarios is a recommended best practice because it allows decision makers to better consider both short- and long-term risks and opportunities. As part of its routine science practices, the USGS regularly reviews the state of knowledge of climate science, develops and maintains best practices in using global climate models to project climate change impacts, and provides data and interpretations of potential impacts to the DOI and other stakeholders. Management and policy decisions within the DOI will reflect different tolerances for risk, which has implications for what type of information should be considered and how that information should be used. It is suggested that a followup document be produced that would describe in more detail how these management decisions with differing risk tolerances can be made effectively and consistently in light of an uncertain future.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2017

U.S. Geological Survey Karst Interest Group Proceedings, San Antonio, Texas, May 16–18, 2017

Introduction and Acknowledgments Karst aquifer systems are present throughout parts of the United States and some of its territories, and have developed in carbonate rocks (primarily limestone and dolomite) and evaporites (gypsum, anhydrite, and halite) that span an interval of time encompassing more than 550 million years. The depositional environments, diagenetic processes, post-depositional tectonic events, and geochemical weathering processes that form karst aquifers are varied and complex. These factors involve biological, chemical, and physical changes that when combined with the diverse climatic regimes in which karst development has taken place, result in the unique dual- or triple-porosity nature of karst aquifers. These complex hydrogeologic systems typically represent challenging and unique conditions to scientists attempting to study groundwater flow and contaminant transport in these terrains. The dissolution of carbonate rocks and the subsequent development of distinct and beautiful landscapes, caverns, and springs have resulted in the most exceptional karst areas being designated as national or state parks. Tens of thousands of similar areas in the United States have been developed into commercial caverns and known privately owned caves. Both public and private properties provide access for scientists to study the flow of groundwater in situ . Likewise, the range and complexity of landforms and groundwater flow systems associated with karst terrains are enormous, perhaps more than for any other aquifer type. Karst aquifers and landscapes that form in tropical areas, such as the cockpit karst along the north coast of Puerto Rico, differ greatly from karst landforms in more arid climates, such as the Edwards Plateau in west-central Texas or the Guadalupe Mountains near Carlsbad, New Mexico, where hypogenic processes have played a major role in speleogenesis. Many of these public and private lands also contain unique flora and fauna associated with these karst hydrogeologic systems. As a result, numerous federal, state, and local agencies have a strong interest in the study of karst terrains. Many of the major springs and aquifers in the United States have developed in carbonate rocks, such as the Floridan aquifer system in Florida and parts of Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina; the Ozark Plateaus aquifer system in parts of Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma; and the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system in west-central Texas. These aquifers, and the springs that discharge from them, serve as major water-supply sources and form unique ecological habitats. Competition for the water resources of karst aquifers is common, and urban development and the lack of attenuation of contaminants in karst areas due to dissolution features that form direct pathways into karst aquifers can impact the ecosystem and water quality associated with these aquifers. The concept for developing a platform for interaction among scientists within the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) working on karst-related studies evolved from the November 1999 National Groundwater Meeting of the USGS. As a result, the Karst Interest Group (KIG) was formed in 2000. The KIG is a loose-knit, grass-roots organization of USGS and non-USGS scientists and researchers devoted to fostering better communication among scientists working on, or interested in, karst science. The primary mission of the KIG is to encourage and support interdisciplinary collaboration and technology transfer among scientists working in karst areas. Additionally, the KIG encourages collaborative studies between the different mission areas of the USGS as well as with other federal and state agencies, and with researchers from academia and institutes. To accomplish its mission, the KIG has organized a series of workshops that have been held near nationally important karst areas. To date (2017) seven KIG workshops, including the workshop documented in this report, have been held. The workshops typically include oral and poster sessions on selected karst-related topics and research, as well as field trips to local karst areas. To increase non-USGS participation an effort was made for the workshops to be held at a university or institute beginning with the fourth workshop. Proceedings of the workshops are published by the USGS and are available online at the USGS publications warehouse https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/ by using the search term “karst interest group.” The first KIG workshop was held in St. Petersburg, Florida, in 2001, in the vicinity of the large springs and other karst features of the Floridan aquifer system. The second KIG workshop was held in 2002, in Shepherdstown, West Virginia, in proximity to the carbonate aquifers of the northern Shenandoah Valley, and highlighted an invited presentation on karst literature by the late Barry F. Beck of P.E. LaMoreaux and Associates. The third KIG workshop was held in 2005, in Rapid City, South Dakota, near evaporite karst features in limestones of the Madison Group in the Black Hills of South Dakota. The Rapid City KIG workshop included field trips to Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument, and featured a presentation by Thomas Casadevall, then USGS Central Region Director, on the status of Earth science at the USGS. The fourth KIG workshop in 2008 was hosted by the Hoffman Environmental Research Institute and Center for Cave and Karst Studies at Western Kentucky University in Bowling Green, Kentucky, near Mammoth Cave National Park and karst features of the Chester Upland and Pennyroyal Plateau. The workshop featured a late-night field trip into Mammoth Cave led by Rickard Toomey and Rick Olsen, National Park Service. The fifth KIG workshop in 2011 was a joint meeting of the USGS KIG and University of Arkansas HydroDays, hosted by the Department of Geosciences at the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville. The workshop featured an outstanding field trip to the unique karst terrain along the Buffalo National River in the southern Ozarks, and a keynote presentation on paleokarst in the United States was delivered by Art and Peggy Palmer. The sixth KIG workshop was hosted by the National Cave and Karst Research Institute (NCKRI) in 2014, in Carlsbad, New Mexico. George Veni, Director of the NCKRI, served as a co-chair of the workshop with Eve Kuniansky of the USGS. The workshop featured speaker Dr. Penelope Boston, Director of Cave and Karst Studies at New Mexico Tech, Socorro, and Academic Director at the NCKRI, who addressed the future of karst research. The field trip on evaporite karst of the lower Pecos Valley was led by Lewis Land (NCKRI karst hydrologist), and the field trip on the geology of Carlsbad Caverns National Park was led by George Veni. This current seventh KIG workshop is being held in San Antonio at the University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA). This 2017 workshop is being hosted by the Department of Geological Sciences’ Student Geological Society (SGS), and student chapters of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG) and Association of Engineering Geologists (AEG), with support by the UTSA Department of Geological Sciences and Center for Water Research. The UTSA student chapter presidents, Jose Silvestre (SGS), John Cooper (AAPG), and Tyler Mead (AEG) serve as co-chairs of the 2017 workshop with Eve Kuniansky of the USGS. The technical session committee is chaired by Eve Kuniansky, USGS, and includes Michael Bradley, Tom Byl, Rebecca Lambert, John Lane, and James Kaufmann, all USGS, and Patrick Tucci, retired USGS. The logistics committee includes Amy Clark, Yongli Gao, and Lance Lambert (Department Chair), UTSA Department of Geological Sciences; and Ryan Banta and Allan Clark, USGS, San Antonio, Texas. The field trip committee is chaired by Allan Clark and includes Amy Clark, Yongli Gao, and Keith Muehlestein, UTSA; Marcus Gary, Edwards Aquifer Authority and University of Texas at Austin; Ron Green, Southwest Research Institute; Geary Schindel, Edwards Aquifer Authority; and George Veni, NCKRI. Additionally, two organizations have assisted the UTSA student chapters in hosting the meeting by donating funds to the chapters: the Edwards Aquifer Authority, San Antonio, Texas, and the Barton Springs Edwards Aquifer Authority, Austin, Texas. Additionally, Yongli Gao, Center for Water Research and Department of Geological Sciences, UTSA, helped develop sessions on cave and karst research in China for this workshop. These proceedings could not have been accomplished without the assistance of Lawrence E. Spangler as co-editor who not only has subject matter expertise, but also serves as an editor with the USGS Science Publishing Network. We sincerely hope that this workshop continues to promote future collaboration among scientists of varied and diverse backgrounds, and improves our understanding of karst aquifer systems in the United States and its territories. The extended abstracts of USGS authors were peer reviewed and approved for publication by the USGS. Articles submitted by university researchers and other federal and state agencies did not go through the formal USGS peer review and approval process, and therefore may not adhere to USGS editorial standards or stratigraphic nomenclature. However, all articles had a minimum of two peer reviews and were edited for consistency of appearance in the proceedings. The use of trade, firm or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. The USGS Water Availability and Use Science Program funded the publication costs of the proceedings.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2011

Developing an institutional framework to incorporate ecosystem services into decision making-Proceedings of a workshop

The routine and effective incorporation of ecosystem services information into resource management decisions requires a careful consideration of the value of goods and services provided by natural systems. A multidisciplinary workshop was held in October 2008 on "Developing an Institutional Framework to Incorporate Ecosystem Services into Decision Making." This report summarizes that workshop, which focused on examining the relationship between an institutional framework and consideration of ecosystem services in resource management decision making. This workshop was the third in a series of three preconference workshops associated with ACES 2008 (A Conference on Ecosystem Services): Using Science for Decision Making in Dynamic Systems. These workshops were designed to explore the ACES 2008 theme on decision making and how the concept of ecosystem services can more effectively be incorporated into conservation, restoration, resource management, and development decisions. Preconference workshop 1, "Developing a Vision: Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Decision Making," was held April 15, 2008, in Cambridge, MA. In this workshop, participants addressed what would have to happen to make ecosystem services more routinely and effectively used in conservation, restoration, resource management, and development decisions, and identified some key challenges to developing the analytical framework (Hogan and others, 2009). Preconference workshop 2, "Developing an Analytical Framework: Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Decision Making," was held July 28, 2008, in Naples, FL, and focused on the analytical process and identification of research priorities for ecosystem services, their production and use, their spatial and temporal characteristics, their relationship with natural systems, and their interdependencies (Hogan and others, 2010). The summary presented here synthesizes the discussion at workshop 3 and considers how institutional structures and policy instruments can be used to achieve the vision developed in workshop 1, while recognizing the analytical capabilities and limitations identified in workshop 2. Our purpose was to identify how to use ecosystem service information more effectively and broadly in resource management and development decisions. We recognized the need to facilitate an integrated understanding of (1) the natural capital that produces ecosystem services; (2) the geospatial and temporal aspects of ecosystem service production, values, and use; (3) the value of ecosystem services (monetary and nonmonetary); and (4) institutional instruments, processes, and structures (property rights, laws, governance structures, and courts, for example). Interdisciplinary collaboration and understanding is beneficial and needs to engage stakeholders. The appropriate use of institutional structures, including markets, to integrate ecosystem services into decision making depends on the players and characteristics of the specific situation (such as stakeholders, the ecosystem, resources, and the political environment). Incorporating ecosystem service values into decisions requires consideration of place-based social, cultural, economic, and landscape characteristics and institutions. Thus, a single, prescribed solution will not work-various institutional strategies must be used in different situations. Market-based approaches require appropriate regulations, monitoring, and enforcement, depending on the situation and place. Further, market approaches will need to be coupled with nonmarket approaches into an integrated institutional framework.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2006

EAARL submarine topography: Biscayne National Park

This lidar-derived submarine topography map was produced as a collaborative effort between the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Coastal and Marine Geology Program, National Park Service (NPS) South Florida/Caribbean Network Inventory and Monitoring Program, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Wallops Flight Facility. One objective of this research is to create techniques to survey coral reefs for the purposes of habitat mapping, ecological monitoring, change detection, and event assessment (for example: bleaching, hurricanes, disease outbreaks). As part of this project, data from an innovative instrument under development at the NASA Wallops Flight Facility, the NASA Experimental Airborne Advanced Research Lidar (EAARL) are being used. This sensor has the potential to make significant contributions in this realm for measuring water depth and conducting cross-environment surveys. High spectral resolution, water-column correction, and low costs were found to be key factors in providing accurate and affordable imagery to managers of coastal tropical habitats.

Florida↗
USGS1984

Refuge management analyses: research needs for Muscatatuck National Wildlife Refuge

Muscatatuck National Wildlife Refuge, located in southeastern Indiana, was established by the Migratory Bird Conservation Commission in 1966. Land use planning for the Refuge formally began in 1971, and development of facilities designed in that planning effort is now nearing completion. As these facilities become operational, Refuge personnel will be manipulating water (both spatially and temporally) and other habitat components to achieve the joint Refuge goals of natural resource conservation and public use. This situation offers a unique opportunity to institute research and management studies designed to evaluate and enhance the effectiveness of the management regime in providing for the needs of migratory waterfowl and other wildlife resources.

Indiana↗