Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Cultural Resources Management”

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

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

At least 91 records · Page 5Linked to original sources
USGS1997

Proceedings of the third biennial conference of research on the Colorado Plateau

The papers in this volume are contributions from federal, state, and private sector researchers, who have come together to share scientific information with land managers on the Colorado Plateau. This Proceedings is the third in a series of publications that focuses on providing information to land managers on baseline scientific information pertaining to physical, cultural and biological resources of the Colorado Plateau. Support for these studies came from a spectrum of federal, state, and private partners concerned about the well-being of the Plateau's resources. I applaud the effort of the contributors. With modest funding and a broad base of public and institutional support, these authors have pursued important lines of work in the four states that comprise the Colorado Plateau biogeographic region.

Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah↗
USGS2019

Recreational impacts to wildlife: Managing visitors and resources to protect wildlife

Publication Abstract: Visitor use management is essential for maximizing benefits for visitors while achieving and maintaining desired resource conditions and visitor experiences on federally managed lands and waters. Visitor capacity, a component of visitor use management, is defined as the maximum amounts and types of visitor use that an area can accommodate while achieving and maintaining the desired resource conditions and visitor experiences that are consistent with the purposes for which the area was established. This visitor capacity guidebook, in combination with the “Visitor Use Management Framework” (the framework), provides managers with processes to collaboratively develop long-term strategies to manage the amounts and types of visitor use to protect resources, improve access, connect visitors to key experiences, and achieve desired conditions. The purpose of this guidebook is to provide cohesive guidance on identifying and implementing visitor capacity on federally managed lands and waters. Similar to the framework, the sliding scale of analysis is discussed throughout this guidebook to ensure the investment of time, money, and other resources for a project is commensurate with the complexity of the project and the consequences of the decision. Overall, this guidebook is meant to expand on the framework and guide a professional and consistent approach to identifying and implementing visitor capacity. Paper Abstract: Most protected natural areas, including parks, forests, and wildlife refuges, are managed under a dual mandate to preserve predominantly natural settings and processes while also accommodating recreational visitation. Visitor activities can have deleterious impacts to protected area vegetation, soil, water, wildlife, and cultural resources. The term impact denotes undesirable visitor-related effects to natural resources and/or wildlife. This paper reviews the management of recreation impacts to wildlife, including discussions of influential factors, impact indicators, and the range of management responses. This information is provided to assist recreation and land managers in avoiding or minimizing visitor impact to wildlife, particularly related to decision-making within the new Visitor Use Management (VUM) framework. Such decision-making requires a thorough understanding of the different types of wildlife impact and the use-related, environmental, and managerial factors that influence them.

Report↗
USGS2011

Monitoring habitat restoration projects: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Pacific Region Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program and Coastal Program Protocol

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (FWS) Pacific Region (Region 1) includes more than 158 million acres (almost 247,000 square miles) of land base in Idaho, Oregon, Washington, Hawai`i, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, Guam, the Republic of Palau, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of the Marshall Islands. Region 1 is ecologically diverse with landscapes that range from coral reefs, broadleaf tropical forests, and tropical savannahs in the Pacific Islands, to glacial streams and lakes, lush old-growth rainforests, inland fjords, and coastal shoreline in the Pacific Northwest, to the forested mountains, shrub-steppe desert, and native grasslands in the Inland Northwest. Similarly, the people of the different landscapes perceive, value, and manage their natural resources in ways unique to their respective regions and cultures. The Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program (Partners Program) and Coastal Program work with a variety of partners in Region 1 including individual landowners, watershed councils, land trusts, Soil and Water Conservation Districts, non-governmental organizations, Tribal governments, Native Hawaiian organizations, and local, State, and Federal agencies. The Partners Program is the FWS's vanguard for working with private landowners to voluntarily restore and conserve fish and wildlife habitat. Using non-regulatory incentives, the Partners Program engages willing partners to conserve and protect valuable fish and wildlife habitat on their property and in their communities. This is accomplished by providing the funding support and technical and planning tools needed to make on-the-ground conservation affordable, feasible, and effective. The primary goals of the Pacific Region Partners Program are to: Promote citizen and community-based stewardship efforts for fish and wildlife conservation Contribute to the recovery of at-risk species, Protect the environmental integrity of the National Wildlife Refuges, Contribute to the implementation of the State Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategies, and Help achieve the objectives of the National Fish Habitat Partnerships and regionally based bird conservation plans (for example, North American Waterfowl Management Plan, U.S. Pacific Island Shorebird Conservation Plans, Intermountain West Regional Shorebird Plan, etc.). The Partners Program accomplishes these priorities by: Developing and maintaining strong partnerships, and delivering on-the-ground habitat restoration projects designed to reestablish habitat function and restore natural processes; Addressing key habitat limiting factors for declining species; Providing corridors for wildlife and decrease impediments to native fish and wildlife migration; and Enhancing native plant communities by reducing invasive species and improving native species composition. The Coastal Program is a voluntary fish and wildlife conservation program that focuses on watershed-scale, long-term collaborative resource planning and on-the-ground restoration projects in high-priority coastal areas. The Coastal Program conducts planning and restoration work on private, State, and Federal lands, and partnerships with other agencies-Native American Tribes, citizens, and organizations are emphasized. Coastal Program goals include restoring and protecting coastal habitat, providing technical and cost-sharing assistance where appropriate, supporting community-based restoration, collecting and developing information on the status of and threats to fish and wildlife, and using outreach to promote stewardship of coastal resources. The diversity of habitats and partners in Region 1 present many opportunities for conducting restoration projects. Faced with this abundance of opportunity, the Partners Program and Coastal Program must ensure that limited staffing and project dollars are allocated to benefit the highest priority resources and achieve the highest quality results for Federal trust species. In 2007, the Partners Program and Coastal Program developed a Strategic Plan to guide program operations and more efficiently conserve habitat by focusing partnership building and habitat improvement actions within 35 Partners Program Focus Areas and 9 Coastal Program Focus Areas (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010). The Strategic Plan also contains four other goals: broaden and strengthen partnerships; improve information sharing and communications; enhance workforce; and increase accountability to ensure that program resources are used efficiently and effectively. This protocol will help achieve all goals of the Strategic Plan.

Techniques and Methods↗
USGS2013

An overview of the Southern Nevada Agency Partnership science and research synthesis

Maintaining and restoring the diverse ecosystems and resources that occur in southern Nevada in the face of rapid socio-economic and ecological change presents numerous challenged to Federal land managers. Rapid population growth since the 1980s, the land uses associated with that growth, and the interactions of those uses with the generally dry and highly variable climate result in numerous stresses to ecosystems, species, and cultural resource. In addition, climate models predict that the rate of temperature increase and, thus, changes in ecological processes, will be highest for ecosystems like the Mojave Desert. The Southern Nevada Agency Partnership (SNAP; http:www.SNAP.gov) was established in 1999 to address common issues pertaining to public lands in southern Nevada. Partners include the Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and USDA Forest Service and they work with each other, the local community, and other partners. SNAP agencies manage more than seven million acres of public lands in southern Nevada (95% of the land area). Federal land includes two national recreation areas, two national conservation area, four national wildlife refuges, 18 congressionally designated wilderness areas, five wilderness study areas, and 22 areas of critical environmental concern. The partnership's activities are mainly centered in Southern Nevada's Clark County (fig. 1.1), but lands managed by SNAP partner agencies also include portions of Lake Mead National Recreation Area in Mohave County, Arizona, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and USDA Forest Service-managed lands in Lincoln and Nye Counties, Nevada, and all lands and activities managed by the Southern Nevada District Office of the Bureau of Land Management. These lands encompass nine distinct ecosystem types (fig. 1.2), support multiple species of management concern an 17 listed species, and are rich in cultural and historic resource. This introductory executive summary discusses the Science and Research Strategy developed by the SNAP agencies, the Science and Research Report, and need for science-based management in southern Nevada.

Nevada↗
USGS2014

Resource manager information needs regarding hydrologic regime shifts for the North Pacific Landscape Conservation

Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs) are a network of 22 public-private partnerships, defined by ecoregion, that share and provide science to ensure the sustainability of land, water, wildlife, and cultural resources in North America. LCCs were established by the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) in recognition of the fact that response to climate change must be coordinated on a landscape-level basis because important resources, ecosystem processes, and resource management challenges extend beyond most of the boundaries considered in current natural resource management. The North Pacific LCC (NPLCC) covers the range of the Pacific coastal temperate rainforest, including an area of 528,360 km 2 spanning 22 degrees of latitude from the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska, to Bodega Bay, California. The coverage area includes parts of four States, two Canadian provinces, and more than 100 Tribes and First Nation language groups. It extends from alpine areas at the crest of coastal mountains across subalpine, montane, and lowland forests to the nearshore marine environment. This wide range of latitudes and elevation zones; terrestrial, freshwater, and marine habitats; and complex jurisdictional boundaries hosts a diversity of natural resources and their corresponding management issues are equally diverse. As evidenced by the Science and Traditional Ecological Knowledge (S-TEK) Strategy guiding principles, identifying and responding to the needs of resource managers is key to the success of the NPLCC. To help achieve this goal of the NPLCC, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has organized several workshops with resource managers and resource scientists to identify management information needs relevant to the priority topics identified in the S-TEK Strategy. Here, we detail the results from a first workshop to address the effects of changes in hydrologic regime on rivers, streams, and riparian corridors. The workshop focused on a subset of the full NPLCC geography and was structured to answer the following questions: What are the valued resources and services that may be affected by hydrologic regime changes in the region? What are the management goals for those resources? How is climate change anticipated to affect valued resources and goals? What adaptation strategies may managers use in response to anticipated changes in resources due to climate-related hydrologic change? What information is needed to inform and use management responses?

Open-File Report↗
USGS2010

Southwestern desert resources

The southwestern deserts stretch from southeastern California to west Texas and then south to central Mexico. The landscape of this region is known as basin and range topography featuring to "sky islands" of forest rising from the desert lowlands which creates a uniquely diverse ecology. The region is further complicated by an international border, where governments have caused difficulties for many animal populations. This book puts a spotlight on individual research projects which are specific examples of work being done in the area and when they are all brought together, to shed a general light of understanding the biological and cultural resources of this vast region so that those same resources can be managed as effectively and efficiently as possible. The intent is to show that collaborative efforts among federal, state agency, university, and private sector researchers working with land managers, provides better science and better management than when scientists and land managers work independently.

Book↗
USGS2010

USGS-NPS Servicewide Benthic Mapping Program (SBMP) workshop report

Executive Summary The National Park Service (NPS) Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) Program recently allocated funds to initiate a benthic mapping program in ocean and Great Lakes parks in alignment with the NPS Ocean Park Stewardship 2007-2008 Action Plan. Seventy-four (ocean and Great Lakes) parks, spanning more than 5,000 miles of coastline, many affected by increasing coastal storms and other natural and anthropogenic processes, make the development of a Servicewide Benthic Mapping Program (SBMP) timely. The resulting maps and associated reports will be provided to NPS managers in a consistent servicewide format to help park managers protect and manage the 3 million acres of submerged National Park System natural and cultural resources. Of the 74 ocean and Great Lakes park units, the 40 parks with submerged acreage will be the focus in the early years of the SBMP. The NPS and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) convened a workshop (June 3-5, 2008) in Lakewood, CO. The assembly of experts from the NPS and other Federal and non-Federal agencies clarified the needs and goals of the NPS SBMP and was one of the key first steps in designing the benthic mapping program. The central needs for individual parks, park networks, and regions identified by workshop participants were maps including bathymetry, bottom type, geology, and biology. This workshop, although not an exhaustive survey of data-acquisition technologies, highlighted the more promising technologies being used, existing sources of data, and the need for partnerships to leverage resources. Workshop products include recommended classification schemes and management approaches for consistent application and products similar to other long-term NPS benthic mapping efforts. As part of the SBMP, recommendations from this workshop, including application of an improved version of the Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard (CMECS), will be tested in several pilot parks. In 2008, in conjunction with the findings of this workshop, the NPS funded benthic mapping projects in Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve, Golden Gate National Recreational Area, Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, Gulf Islands National Seashore, Virgin Islands National Park, and Virgin Islands Coral Reef National Monument. Full design and protocols of the SBMP based on the findings of this workshop are detailed in a second document dedicated to the subject.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1985

Interim program for land cover mapping in Alaska utilizing Landsat digital data

The enactment of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) in 1980 imposed mandates on all major land management agencies in Alaska to prepare comprehensive resource and management plans to assess wildlife habitat, oil and gas exploration and development, wild and scenic river, land disposals, timber production, and archaeological and cultural resources, To meet these objective, the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) has embarked on a plan to classify land cover for the entire State of Alaska using Landsat digital data. the USGS, in cooperation with other agencies, has completely Landsat-derived land use and land cover classification of 115 million acres for the State of Alaska. With this work as a substantial foundation, the USGS has prepared a comprehensive plan for classifying the remaining areas of Alaska. The development of this program will lead to a complete interim land use and land cover classification system for Alaska and provide for the dissemination of map products, statistics, and acreage summaries for all areas of Alaska at 1:250,000 scale. It also allows for the dissemination of Landsat digital data for those areas.

Alaska↗
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↗
USGS1996

Trail degradation as influenced by environmental factors: A state-of-the-knowledge review

Excerpt: Human use and misuse of land has been causing extensive degradation of the very natural resources on which we depend. National parks, wilderness and other protected natural or semi-natural areas (referred to as natural areas hereafter) represent efforts to preserve our natural heritage from further exploitation. Such areas also provide outstanding recreational, research, and educational opportunities. However, resource impacts resulting from overuse and inappropriate management increasingly threaten these protected areas and erode their natural and cultural values. Among the many forms of recreational impact, those associated with trail development and use are often a major concern of natural area managers and visitors. Such impacts impair and degrade the functions that trails serve, including (1) protecting resources by concentrating traffic on a hardened tread, (2) providing recreational opportunities along aesthetically pleasing trail routes, and (3) facilitating recreational use by providing a transportation network. The extensive distribution of trails and their degrading condition in many natural areas can have pervasive environmental effects through alteration of natural drainage patterns, erosion and deposition of soil, introduction of exotic vegetation, and increasing human-wildlife conflicts. Degraded trails also threaten the quality of visitor experiences by making travel difficult or unsafe, or by diminishing visitors ?

Journal of Soil and Water Conservation↗
USGS2024

The projected exposure and response of a natural barrier island system to climate-driven coastal hazards

Accelerating sea level rise (SLR) and changing storm patterns will increasingly expose barrier islands to coastal hazards, including flooding, erosion, and rising groundwater tables. We assess the exposure of Cape Lookout National Seashore, a barrier island system in North Carolina (USA), to projected SLR and storm hazards over the twenty-first century. We estimate that with 0.5 m of SLR, 47% of current subaerial barrier island area would be flooded daily, and the 1-year return period storm would flood 74%. For 20-year return period storms, over 85% is projected to be flooded for any SLR. The modelled groundwater table is already shallow (< 2 m deep), and while projected to shoal to the land surface with SLR, marine flooding is projected to overtake areas with emergent groundwater. Projected shoreline retreat reaches an average of 178 m with 1 m of SLR and no interventions, which is over 60% of the current island width at narrower locations. Compounding these hazards is subsidence, with one-third of the study area currently lowering at > 2 mm/yr. Our results demonstrate the difficulty of managing natural barrier systems such as those managed by federal park systems tasked with maintaining natural ecosystems and protecting cultural resources.

North Carolina↗
USGS2021

Integrating ecological impacts: Perspectives on drought in the Upper Missouri Headwaters, Montana, United States

Drought is a complex challenge experienced in specific locations through diverse impacts, including ecological impacts. Different professionals involved in drought preparedness and response approach the problem from different points of view, which means they may or may not recognize ecological impacts. This study examines the extent to which interviewees perceive ecological drought in the Upper Missouri Headwaters basin in southwestern Montana. Through semistructured interviews, this research investigates individuals’ perceptions of drought by analyzing how they define drought, how they describe their roles related to drought, and the extent to which they emphasize ecological impacts of drought. Results suggest that while most interviewees have an integrated understanding of drought, they tend to emphasize either ecological or nonecological impacts of drought. This focus was termed their drought orientation. Next, the analysis considers how participants understand exposure to drought. Results indicate that participants view drought as a complex problem driven by both human and natural factors. Last, the paper explores understandings of the available solution space by examining interviewees’ views on adaptive capacity, particularly factors that facilitate or hinder the ability of the Upper Missouri Headwaters region to cope with drought. Participants emphasized that adaptive capacity is both helped and hindered by institutional, cultural, and economic factors, as well as by available information and past resource management practices. Understanding how interviewees perceive the challenges of drought can shape drought preparedness and response, allowing those designing programs to better align their efforts to the perceptions of their target audience.

Montana↗
USGS1970

Field trip guidebook to the hydrogeology of the Rock-Fox River basin of Southeastern Wisconsin

On this trip we will examine some hydrogeologic characteristics of glacial features and emphasize ground-water management within the Rock-Fox River basin. Field stops will include the hydrogeology of a classical glacial terrane--the Kettle moraine--and the management of ground-water resources for industrial, municipal, agricultural, and fish-culture purposes. Descriptions of the geology, soils, water availability and characteristics, water quality, water use, and water problems within the basin are given in the accompanying U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas (HA-360). This atlas is a product of the cooperative program of University Extension--the University of Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey.

Wisconsin↗
USGS2010

A Servicewide Benthic Mapping Program for National Parks

In 2007, the National Park Service (NPS) Inventory and Monitoring Program directed the initiation of a benthic habitat mapping program in ocean and coastal parks in alignment with the NPS Ocean Park Stewardship 2007-2008 Action Plan. With 74 ocean and Great Lakes parks stretching over more than 5,000 miles of coastline across 26 States and territories, this Servicewide Benthic Mapping Program (SBMP) is essential. This program will deliver benthic habitat maps and their associated inventory reports to NPS managers in a consistent, servicewide format to support informed management and protection of 3 million acres of submerged National Park System natural and cultural resources. The NPS and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) convened a workshop June 3-5, 2008, in Lakewood, Colo., to discuss the goals and develop the design of the NPS SBMP with an assembly of experts (Moses and others, 2010) who identified park needs and suggested best practices for inventory and mapping of bathymetry, benthic cover, geology, geomorphology, and some water-column properties. The recommended SBMP protocols include servicewide standards (such as gap analysis, minimum accuracy, final products) as well as standards that can be adapted to fit network and park unit needs (for example, minimum mapping unit, mapping priorities). SBMP Mapping Process. The SBMP calls for a multi-step mapping process for each park, beginning with a gap assessment and data mining to determine data resources and needs. An interagency announcement of intent to acquire new data will provide opportunities to leverage partnerships. Prior to new data acquisition, all involved parties should be included in a scoping meeting held at network scale. Data collection will be followed by processing and interpretation, and finally expert review and publication. After publication, all digital materials will be archived in a common format. SBMP Classification Scheme. The SBMP will map using the Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard (CMECS) that is being modified to include all NPS needs, such as lacustrine ecosystems and submerged cultural resources. CMECS Version III (Madden and others, 2010) includes components for water column, biotic cover, surface geology, sub-benthic, and geoform. SBMP Data Archiving. The SBMP calls for the storage of all raw data and final products in common-use data formats. The concept of 'collect once, use often' is essential to efficient use of mapping resources. Data should also be shared with other agencies and the public through various digital clearing houses, such as Geospatial One-Stop (http://gos2.geodata.gov/wps/portal/gos). To be most useful for managing submerged resources, the SBMP advocates the inventory and mapping of the five components of marine ecosystems: surface geology, biotic cover, geoform, sub-benthic, and water column. A complete benthic inventory of a park would include maps of bathymetry and the five components of CMECS. The completion of mapping for any set of components, such as bathymetry and surface geology, or a particular theme (for example, submerged aquatic vegetation) should also include a printed report.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2011

Informal trail monitoring protocols: Denali National Park and Preserve

The National Park Service (NPS) accommodates nearly 300 million visitors per year, visitation that presents managers with substantial challenges at some 394 park units across some 83.6 million acres of protected lands. An increasing number of visitors inevitably contribute negative effects to fragile natural and cultural resources. Such visitation - related resource impacts can degrade natural conditions and processes and the quality of recreation experiences. According to the NPS Management Policies: ―The fundamental purpose of the national park system , established by the Organic Act and reaffirmed by the General Authorities Act, as amended, begins with a mandate to conserve park resources and values...The fundamental purpose of all parks also includes providing for the enjoyment of park resources and values by the people of the United States.‖ (NPS 2006 b , Section 1.4.3). However, what might appear to be dual mandates, visitation and resource protection, are clarified to reveal the primacy of resource protection. The Management Policies acknowledge that so me resource degradation is an inevitable consequence of visitation, but directs managers to ―ensure that any adverse impacts are the minimum necessary, unavoidable, cannot be further mitigated, and do not constitute impairment or derogation of park resources and values‖ (NPS 2006 b ).

Alaska↗
USGS2025

National Park Service staff perspectives on how climate change affects visitor use

1. Many public lands, including those managed by the U.S. National Park Service(NPS), have the purpose of conserving natural and cultural resources and providing opportunities for visitors to recreate in and enjoy these areas. Achieving this mission becomes more challenging as drought, flooding, increasing temperatures and other climatic change effects are impacting NPS lands and visitors and affecting factors such as visitation, recreation access and health and safety among other aspects of park operations. 2. However, the literature lacks insights from staff dealing with on-the-ground climate impacts to visitor use. To address this gap, we held semi-structured interviews with 63 staff from 31 NPS units across the United States (U.S.) to better understand the effects of climate change on visitor use. We qualitatively analysed the interviews using both deductive and inductive methods to identify key themes. 3. Interview participants consistently noted that climate change is already affecting visitor use at their parks. For instance, increasing temperatures are negatively affecting both staff and visitor safety at parks nationwide, whereas all coastal parks within our sample are already experiencing impacts from sea-level rise or more frequent and severe coastal storms and hurricanes. Other impacts include reduced recreational access, damaged infrastructure and cultural resources and diminished visitor experiences due to fire and smoke. 4. Similarly, concerns about future impacts often revolved around the health and safety of visitors and staff—particularly related to wildfire and smoke, water quality and availability, and increased heat—and climate change forever altering parks. 5. Our research shows staff in parks and protected areas are noticing effects of climate change on visitor use; some of these impacts have not been previously documented in the scientific literature. Study results highlight future visitor use management research needs and key topics to consider for visitor use planning processes.

People and Nature↗
USGS2006

Understanding barriers to implementation of an adaptive land management program

The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission manages over 650,000 ha, including 26 wildlife management and environmental areas. To improve management, they developed an objective-based vegetation management (OBVM) process that focuses on desired conditions of plant communities through an adaptive management framework. Our goals were to understand potential barriers to implementing OBVM and to recommend strategies to overcome barriers. A literature review identified 47 potential barriers in six categories to implementation of adaptive and ecosystem management: logistical, communication, attitudinal, institutional, conceptual, and educational. We explored these barriers through a bureau-wide survey of 90 staff involved in OBVM and personal interviews with area managers, scientists, and administrators. The survey incorporated an organizational culture assessment instrument to gauge how institutional factors might influence OBVM implementation. The survey response rate was 69%. Logistics and communications were the greatest barriers to implementing OBVM. Respondents perceived that the agency had inadequate resources for implementing OBVM and provided inadequate information. About one-third of the respondents believed OBVM would decrease their job flexibility and perceived greater institutional barriers to the approach. The 43% of respondents who believed they would have more responsibility under OBVM also had greater attitudinal barriers. A similar percentage of respondents reported OBVM would not give enough priority to wildlife. Staff believed that current agency culture was hierarchical but preferred a culture that would provide more flexibility for adaptive management and would foster learning from land management activities. In light of the barriers to OBVM, we recommend the following: (1) mitigation of logistical barriers by addressing real and perceived constraints of staff, funds, and other resources in a participatory manner; (2) mitigation of communication barriers through interpersonal and electronic communication channels; (3) development of an OBVM external advisory committee; and (4) adoption of characteristics of an organizational culture that promotes flexibility and learning. ??2006 Society for Conservation Biology.

Conservation Biology↗
USGS2024

Using systematic conservation planning to recover climate resilient habitat for threatened and endangered species while retaining areas of cultural importance

The effective management of at-risk species often requires fine-scale actions by natural resource managers. However, balancing these actions with concurrent land uses is challenging, particularly when compounded by the interplay of climate shifts, and escalating wildland–urban interface conflicts. We used spatial prioritization tools designed for biodiversity conservation to help resource managers on the Island of Lānaʻi prioritize mutually exclusive land use objectives: endangered species recovery and subsistence and recreational hunting. We weighed the current and anticipated future distributions of threatened and endangered plant species against the distribution of non-native game mammals to plan for species recovery more effectively. Prioritization results identified multiple footprints that could support recovery of all endangered species targets in climate resilient areas while retaining the majority of existing hunting areas. However, very little native vegetation was retained in conservation footprints without deliberate inclusion, which increased footprint area by 268%. Scenarios which prioritized contiguous conservation areas also dramatically increased conservation footprint area, although these scenarios may reduce associated fencing costs. This work demonstrates how spatial prioritization may guide localized species recovery efforts by supporting long-term conservation planning that addresses anticipated climate-driven increases in conflict between conservation and other land uses, with clear applicability beyond Lānaʻi.

Conservation↗