Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Environmental Earth Sciences”

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
USGS2020

The Modern Geological Survey; a model for research, innovation, synthjesis: A USGS perspective

Geological Surveys have long filled the role of providing Earth system science data and knowledge. These functions are increasingly complicated by accelerating environmental and societal change. Here we describe the USGS response to these evolving conditions. Underpinning the USGS approach is the recognition that many of the issues facing the U.S. and the world involve the interaction among geologic, hydrologic, and biologic processes, and how these interactions in turn affect society. Therefore, a goal of USGS planning is fostering interdisciplinary science. This focus is occurring in part through implementation of the recommendations of strategic planning teams. The USGS has also put in place groups building a broad information technology infrastructure as well as identifying and disseminating new Earth science research tools. In addition, the USGS has established an analysis and synthesis center that brings together groups of scientists who address interdisciplinary Earth system science issues. The goal is for these building blocks to evolve towards a comprehensive USGS data and knowledge platform; EarthMAP (Earth Monitoring, Assessment, and Projection). We also recognize that the modern geological survey must be a member of a community of geological surveys contributing data to a global database of 3-dimensional biogeophysical observations and interpretations.

Book chapter↗
USGS2010

USGS Science Serves Public Health

Human health so often depends on the health of the environment and wildlife around us. The presence of naturally occurring or human environmental contaminants and the emergence of diseases transferred between animals and humans are growing concerns worldwide. The USGS is a source of natural science information vital for understanding the quantity and quality of our earth and living resources. This information improves our understanding not only of how human activities affect environmental and ecological health, but also of how the quality of our environment and wildlife in turn affects human health. USGS is taking a leadership role in providing the natural science information needed by health researchers, policy makers, and the public to safeguard public health

Fact Sheet↗
USGS1999

Environmental issues associated with fossil fuel resources; an evaluation of research opportunities for the U.S. Geological Survey's Energy Resources Program

Fossil fuel consumption in the United States has nearly tripled within the last 50 years (fig. 1), and is expected to continue increasing. As our knowledge and awareness of environmental consequences related to fossil fuel extraction and use grow, we as a nation, face the challenge of balancing our energy requirements with a desire for environmentally cleaner fuel. To help meet this challenge, the Energy Resources Program (ERP) of the Geologic Division (GD), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) sponsored three internal workshops and a World Wide Web (WWW) workshop. The primary goal of these workshops was to identify those environmental issues that are related to fossil fuels, are national in scope, and are within the purview of the USGS as an earth-science government agency. Those issues so identified will be prioritized according to ERP's future research plan and according to the extent they provide an environmental framework for ERP's petroleum and coal assessments. The purpose of this paper is to provide the results of the internal and WWW workshops as proposed topics of research for future ERP work, delineate studies to answer the questions related to each proposed research area, and link the studies to the seven science goals of the Geologic Division. The information provided herein will be used in preparing the USGS Geologic Division's FY2000 prospectus and ERP's next five-year strategic plan. Acknowledgements. The authors wish to acknowledge information on ERP environmental projects provided by Les Magoon, Paul Lillis, Keith Kvenvolden, Tom Lorenson, and Bob Rosenbauer. Peter Schweitzer was instrumental in providing the software for the WWW workshop, Cheryl Adkisson for constructing the workshop web pages, and Laura Friedrich for constructing the web pages summarizing the internal workshops. Stan Mroczkowski, Jim Otton, Donna Read, and Dorothy Tanti provided notes of or logistical assistance for the internal workshops. This report reflects the collective input of numerous USGS managers and scientists their participation in the workshops is greatly appreciated.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2007

Earth science and public health: Proceedings of the Second National Conference on USGS Health-Related Research

The mission of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is to serve the Nation by providing reliable scientific information to describe and understand the earth; minimize loss of life and property from natural disasters; manage water, biological, energy, and mineral resources; and enhance and protect our quality of life. As the Nation?s largest water, earth, and biological science and civilian mapping agency, the USGS can play a significant role in providing scientific knowledge and information that will improve our understanding of the relations of environment and wildlife to human health and disease. USGS human health-related research is unique in the Federal government because it brings together a broad spectrum of natural science expertise and information, including extensive data collection and monitoring on varied landscapes and ecosystems across the Nation. USGS can provide a great service to the public health community by synthesizing the scientific information and knowledge on our natural and living resources that influence human health, and by bringing this science to the public health community in a manner that is most useful. Partnerships with health scientists and managers are essential to the success of these efforts. USGS scientists already are working closely with the public health community to pursue rigorous inquiries into the connections between natural science and public health. Partnering agencies include the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Agency for Toxic Substances Disease Registry, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Food and Drug Administration, Mine Safety and Health Administration, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Public Health Service, and the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases. Collaborations between public health scientists and earth scientists can lead to improved solutions for existing and emerging environmental health problems. This report summarizes the presentations and discussions held at the Second National Conference on USGS Health-Related Research, held at the USGS national headquarters in Reston, Virginia. The report presents 68 abstracts of technical presentations made at the conference and summaries of six topical breakout sessions. The abstracts cover a broad range of issues and demonstrate connections between human health and the quality and condition of our environment and wildlife. The summaries of the topical breakout sessions present ideas for advancing interdisciplinary science in areas of earth science and human health.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2022

Use case development for earth monitoring, analysis, and prediction (EarthMAP)—A road map for future integrated predictive science at the U.S. Geological Survey

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 21st-century science strategy 2020–30 promotes a bureau-wide strategy to develop and deliver an integrated, predictive science capability that works at the scales and timelines needed to inform societally relevant resource management and protection and public safety and environmental health decisions (U.S. Geological Survey, 2021). This is the overarching goal of the USGS Earth Monitoring, Analysis, and Prediction (EarthMAP) vision, which consists of three components: (1) integrated data and information, (2) integrated predictive science, and (3) actionable information—all designed and delivered to respond to user needs. To launch this vision and help shape the design and implementation of integrated predictive science, the USGS Regional Offices each developed a set of use cases (hereafter Use Cases)—short descriptions of potential science applications that could clearly address high priority decision-making needs of our stakeholders and that align with an integrated science focus. Use Cases are not actionable science planning documents, nor stand-alone scholarly works, but should be considered as innovative, next-generation science ideas that can be considered as potential components of science plans still under development. The goal of Use Case development was to (1) identify and characterize existing USGS scientific capacities and expertise that can support science goals and products, (2) identify opportunities to leverage current capacities for next-generation science, and (3) foster engagement across the entire Bureau to further refine the USGS strategy for EarthMAP and integrated predictive science. The Use Case development effort documented in this report was coordinated by the Use Case Development Team (UCDT), consisting of representatives from each region. The UCDT undertook five tasks: (1) develop a unified approach to engage bureau scientists consistently across all regions in aspirational thinking about what can be accomplished; (2) work with the regions and their Science Centers to generate an initial set of Use Cases, authored directly by scientists; (3) characterize, summarize, and document the initial set of Use Case submissions from authors to illuminate bureau-level demand for integrated science; (4) compare existing and needed capacities from the Use Case descriptions with preliminary results of the EarthMAP Capacity Assessment (Keisman and others, 2021); and (5) describe lessons learned from the Use Case development process and provide recommendations to inform future efforts to generate integrated science activities. This report outlines the approach the UCDT developed to solicit Use Cases from the regions and summarizes the high-level qualitative findings from this first-round effort. The UCDT received 36 Use Cases from the regions and identified potential points of convergence and commonalities considered useful in making connections among the participating scientists. The Southwest (SW) Region and the Rocky Mountain (RM) Region asked scientists to give special consideration to Use Cases with applicability to the Colorado River Basin, and seven of the Use Cases specifically named that geographic area as a focus. Coastal hazards and coastal resilience were identified in Use Cases from the Alaska (AK), Northeast (NE), and Southeast (SE) Regions. Aspects of wildfire and post-wildfire response were part of Uses Cases from AK, RM, and SW Regions. The greatest convergence of Use Case themes was related to conservation of public lands and waters, which is a powerful linkage lending strength to future collaborative efforts. The most common type of stakeholder decisions that would be informed by the Use Case science applications were related to adaptation, mitigation, and response (for example, how to increase the resilience of coastal communities to climate-related stressors and how to prevent or respond to harmful algal blooms). Other common types of decisions included water and land management decisions (including operational water management decisions such as reservoir operations and land use planning in the sagebrush biome), decisions about how to manage and conserve habitats and species, and risk management decisions (such as managing the post-wildfire flood risks). These decision types are not exclusive because many Use Cases cross categories. Use Case authors identified existing and needed science and technology capabilities required for Use Case implementation, which were then aligned to capabilities assessed in the EarthMAP Capacity Assessment (Keisman and others, 2021). Strong alignment was found for data and information integration approaches, modeling and prediction approaches, and capabilities related to delivery of actionable information. A majority of Use Cases indicated insufficient current capacity for needed data collection methods, data integration, and modeling and prediction approaches, whereas only 25 percent indicated insufficient capacity for actionable information delivery. Overall, many Use Case capacity demand gaps could potentially be met by existing bureau-wide capacity. In addition, nearly half of the Use Cases could potentially be implemented within 3 years if funding, capabilities, and personnel impediments were removed and science priorities were realigned. Several challenges emerged during the Use Case development process. The first challenge was developing an approach that was flexible enough to accommodate regional differences in planning and implementation, while also ensuring enough guidance to promote meaningful summary analyses. The UCDT encountered a strong demand for continuous communication and education to improve overall understanding of the integrated predictive science strategy. Another challenge was managing expectations about EarthMAP activities as a design effort that was not aligned to an immediate funding opportunity. Connecting the Use Cases to stakeholder needs without the opportunity for direct stakeholder engagement was also challenging. The last notable challenge was in obtaining consistent interpretation and characterization of the qualitative data housed in the narrative descriptions of Use Cases, written in different styles. Overall, the 36 Use Cases can serve as components of a road map for advancing integrated monitoring and predictive science throughout the USGS by revealing opportunities to (1) encourage cross-region initiatives that address shared interests in common themes by integrating similar Use Cases and through direct involvement of stakeholders in identifying needs and designing effective responses, (2) leverage the Use Cases to target investments that are aligned with the Bureau and Department of the Interior (DOI) priorities, (3) connect Use Cases and the results of the companion EarthMAP Capacity Assessment (Keisman and others, 2021) to identify potential priorities for capacity building investments, and (4) raise awareness of common integrated and interdisciplinary science interests within and across the regions through Use Case and Capacity Assessment summary outreach activities.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1997

Forum on Geologic mapping applications in the Washington-Baltimore urban area; proceedings; Reston, Virginia, April 23, 1997

The Forum on Geologic mapping applications in the Washington-Baltimore urban area was convened on April 23, 1997, at Reston, Virginia. The forum was cosponsored by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Maryland Geological Survey, with assistance from the Virginia Division of Mineral Resources. Spatial earth science information in the Washington-Baltimore area provides a scientific framework for environmental assessment, urban planning, and future resource and hazard investigations in this area of the Chesapeake Bay watershed, which has sustained three centuries of urban growth.

Circular↗
USGS1979

U.S. Geological Survey activities in New York, 1979

This report describes the work of the U.S. Geological Survey and summarizes projects conducted in New York during 1979. Many of these projects are continuing into the 1980's. The major programs provide basic scientific information concerning water, land, and mineral resources. The Survey also supervises the exploration for mineral fuels on leased outer continental shelf lands. The programs are: (1) Water resources investigations--These encompass (a) statewide networks of measurement stations that provide continuous records of streamflow, groundwater levels, water quality, and sediment discharge, and (b) projects to study local or regional water problems as well as critical water problems of national scope or interest. (2) Geologic and mineral resource surveys and mapping--These studies focus on geologic, mineral, and energy-resources investigations both on land and offshore. (3) Conservation of lands and mineral resources--These studies include the classification and evaluation of mineral resources on the outer continental shelf. (4) Topographic surveys and mapping--These studies include quadrangle, small-scale, and special mapping. (5) Land information and analysis--These studies focus on the interpretation and application of earth-science and related information to multi-disciplinary land-resource and environmental-impact problems. (USGS)

Open-File Report↗
USGS1999

Metal mining and the environment

The booklet, Metal Mining and the Environment, and the colorful companion poster offer new tools for raising awareness and understanding of the impact and issues surrounding metal mining and the environment. The 64-page full-color booklet contains a copy of the poster which includes a student activity on the back. This booklet and poster can help you: illustrate the importance of our natural and environmental resources; provide a geoscience perspective on metal mining and the environment; improve Earth science literacy; and increase student understandings of Earth resources and systems.

Book↗
USGS2021

Earth Resources Observation and Science Center hosting services

The Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center has a long history of leveraging technology in support of Earth science and business applications including data management, processing, and virtualization and complex solutions to visualize and distribute data. It is the aim of EROS to offer operational excellence and service as a key component to the Federal Cloud-Smart directives and Department of the Interior data center consolidation goals. The EROS Center offers space, network, security, and environmental controls and information technology service management. Included with leveraging technology, the EROS Center has industry-leading staff to assist with supporting Earth science and business applications.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS1984

Acid precipitation; an annotated bibliography

This collection of 1660 bibliographies references on the causes and environmental effects of acidic atmospheric deposition was compiled from computerized literature searches of earth-science and chemistry data bases. Categories of information are (1) atmospheric chemistry (gases and aerosols), (2) precipitation chemistry, (3) transport and deposition (wet and dry), (4) aquatic environments (biological and hydrological), (5) terrestrial environments, (6) effects on materials and structures, (7) air and precipitation monitoring and data collection, and (8) modeling studies. References date from the late 1800 's through December 1981. The bibliography includes short summaries of most documents. Omitted are unpublished manuscripts, publications in press, master 's theses and doctoral dissertations, newspaper articles, and book reviews. Coauthors and subject indexes are included. (USGS)

Circular↗
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

A working environment for digital planetary data processing and mapping using ISIS and GRASS GIS

Since the beginning of planetary exploration, mapping has been fundamental to summarize observations returned by scientific missions. Sensor-based mapping has been used to highlight specific features from the planetary surfaces by means of processing. Interpretative mapping makes use of instrumental observations to produce thematic maps that summarize observations of actual data into a specific theme. Geologic maps, for example, are thematic interpretative maps that focus on the representation of materials and processes and their relative timing. The advancements in technology of the last 30 years have allowed us to develop specialized systems where the mapping process can be made entirely in the digital domain. The spread of networked computers on a global scale allowed the rapid propagation of software and digital data such that every researcher can now access digital mapping facilities on his desktop. The efforts to maintain planetary missions data accessible to the scientific community have led to the creation of standardized digital archives that facilitate the access to different datasets by software capable of processing these data from the raw level to the map projected one. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) have been developed to optimize the storage, the analysis, and the retrieval of spatially referenced Earth based environmental geodata; since the last decade these computer programs have become popular among the planetary science community, and recent mission data start to be distributed in formats compatible with these systems. Among all the systems developed for the analysis of planetary and spatially referenced data, we have created a working environment combining two software suites that have similar characteristics in their modular design, their development history, their policy of distribution and their support system. The first, the Integrated Software for Imagers and Spectrometers (ISIS) developed by the United States Geological Survey, represents the state of the art for processing planetary remote sensing data, from the raw unprocessed state to the map projected product. The second, the Geographic Resources Analysis Support System (GRASS) is a Geographic Information System developed by an international team of developers, and one of the core projects promoted by the Open Source Geospatial Foundation (OSGeo). We have worked on enabling the combined use of these software systems throughout the set-up of a common user interface, the unification of the cartographic reference system nomenclature and the minimization of data conversion. Both software packages are distributed with free open source licenses, as well as the source code, scripts and configuration files hereafter presented. In this paper we describe our work done to merge these working environments into a common one, where the user benefits from functionalities of both systems without the need to switch or transfer data from one software suite to the other one. Thereafter we provide an example of its usage in the handling of planetary data and the crafting of a digital geologic map. ?? 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Conference Paper↗
USGS1990

Catalog of US GeoData

The development of geographic information systems (GIS) is a rapidly growing industry that supports natural resources, studies, land management, environmental analysis, and urban and transporation planning. The increasing use of computers for storing and analyzing earth science information has greatly expanded the demand for digital cartographic and geographic data. Digital cartography involves the collection, storage, processing, analysis, and display of map data with the aid of computers. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Nation's largest earth science research agency, through its National Mapping Program, has expanded digital cartography operations to include the collection of elevation, planimetric, land use and land cover, and geographic names information in digital form. This digital information is available on 9-track magnetic tapes and, in the case of 1:2,000,000-scale planimetric digital line graph data, in Compact Disc Read Only Memory (CD-ROM) format. Digital information can be used with all types of geographic and land information systems.

General Information Product↗
USGS1994

Geologic studies in Alaska by the U.S. Geological Survey, 1993

This collection of 19 papers continues the annual series of U.S. Geological Survey reports on geologic investigations in Alaska. Contributions include 14 Articles and 5 shorter Geologic Notes that report results from all corners of the State. USGS activities in Alaska cover a broad spectrum of earth science topics, including the environment, hazards, resources, and geologic framework studies. Three articles focus on the environmental geochemistry of parts of south-central, west-central, and southwestern Alaska. An article on methane released from permafrost near Fairbanks and a note on paleowind direction indicators on the Arctic coastal plain contribute to ongoing climate and paleoclimate investigations. Landslide hazards in the Talkeetna Mountains and Wrangell-St. Elias National Park are discussed in two notes. Possible active fault traces near Alaska's main population center are described in an article on the Castle Mountain fault. An article on Aniakchak volcano presents evidence for a previously unrecognized catastrophic flooding event. Resources and resource assessment on gold, base metals, and coal are discussed in several articles and a note. Geologic framework studies cover tectonics, paleontology, stratigraphy, and metamorphic petrology. One contribution involves field methods; it evaluates the relative accuracy of global positioning systems and topographic map-based methods for deriving location data for field stations. Two bibliographies at the end of the volume list reports about Alaska in USGS publications released in 1993 and reports about Alaska by USGS authors in non-USGS publications in 1993.

Alaska↗
USGS2003

Evaluation of passive diffusion bag samplers, dialysis samplers, and nylon-screen samplers in selected wells at Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, March-April 2002

During March-April 2002, the U.S. Geological Survey, Earth Tech, and EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc., in cooperation with the Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence, tested diffusion samplers at Andersen Air Force Base, Guam. Samplers were deployed in three wells at the Main Base and two wells at Marianas Bonins (MARBO) Annex as potential ground-water monitoring alternatives. Prior to sampler deployment, the wells were tested using a borehole flowmeter to characterize vertical flow within each well. Three types of diffusion samplers were tested: passive diffusion bag (PDB) samplers, dialysis samplers, and nylon-screen samplers. The primary volatile organic compounds (VOCs) tested in ground water at Andersen Air Force Base were trichloroethene and tetrachloroethene. In most comparisons, trichloroethene and tetrachloroethene concentrations in PDB samples closely matched concentrations in pumped samples. Exceptions were in wells where the pumping or ambient flow produced vertical translocation of water in a chemically stratified aquifer. In these wells, PDB samplers probably would be a viable alternative sampling method if they were placed at appropriate depths. In the remaining three test wells, the trichloroethene or tetrachloroethene concentrations obtained with the diffusion samplers closely matched the result from pumped sampling. Chloride concentrations in nylon-screen samplers were compared with chloride concentrations in dialysis and pumped samples to test inorganic-solute diffusion into the samplers across a range of concentrations. The test showed that the results from nylon-screen samplers might have underestimated chloride concentrations at depths with elevated chloride concentrations. The reason for the discrepancy in this investigation is unknown, but may be related to nylon-screen-mesh size, which was smaller than that used in previous investigations.

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗
USGS2002

Spatial data available on the web at http://mrdata.usgs.gov/

Earth science information is important to decisionmakers who formulate public policy related to mineral resource sustainability, land stewardship, environmental hazards, the economy, and public health. To meet the growing demand for easily accessible data, the Mineral Resources Program has developed, in cooperation with other Federal and State agencies, an Internet-based, data-delivery system that allows interested customers worldwide to download accurate, up-to-date mineral resource-related data at any time. All data in the system are spatially located and customers with Internet access and a modern Web browser can easily produce maps having user-defined overlays for any region of interest.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2011

Geology for a changing world 2010-2020-Implementing the U.S. Geological Survey science strategy

This report describes a science strategy for the geologic activities of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the years 2010-2020. It presents six goals with accompanying strategic actions and products that implement the science directions of USGS Circular 1309, 'Facing Tomorrow's Challenges-U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007-2017.' These six goals focus on providing the geologic underpinning needed to wisely use our natural resources, understand and mitigate hazards and environmental change, and understand the relationship between humans and the environment. The goals emphasize the critical role of the USGS in providing long-term research, monitoring, and assessments for the Nation and the world. Further, they describe measures that must be undertaken to ensure geologic expertise and knowledge for the future. The natural science issues facing today's world are complex and cut across many scientific disciplines. The Earth is a system in which atmosphere, oceans, land, and life are all connected. Rocks and soils contain the answers to important questions about the origin of energy and mineral resources, the evolution of life, climate change, natural hazards, ecosystem structures and functions, and the movements of nutrients and toxicants. The science of geology has the power to help us understand the processes that link the physical and biological world so that we can model and forecast changes in the system. Ensuring the success of this strategy will require integration of geological knowledge with the other natural sciences and extensive collaboration across USGS science centers and with partners in Federal, State, and local agencies, academia, industry, nongovernmental organizations and, most importantly, the American public. The first four goals of this report describe the scientific issues facing society in the next 10 years and the actions and products needed to respond to these issues. The final two goals focus on the expertise and infrastructure needed to ensure the long-term sustainability of the geological sciences in the USGS. The ultimate goal of USGS science and of the strategy laid out in this document is to contribute to the development of a sustainable society that operates in harmony with the Earth systems that society depends upon. As we begin the second decade of the 21st century, our Nation faces growing challenges in resource availability, climate and environmental change, and natural hazards. Meeting these challenges will require strong collaboration across the natural and social sciences and extensive partnerships with both the public and private sectors. The six goals described in this document represent a mix of scientific focus areas and operational necessities that together provide a comprehensive roadmap for USGS geologic science to effectively contribute to the USGS mission, providing science for a changing world.

Circular↗
USGS2017

Earth Stewardship: An initiative by the Ecological Society of America to foster engagement to sustain Planet Earth

The Ecological Society of America (ESA) has responded to the growing commitment among ecologists to make their science relevant to society through a series of concerted efforts, including the Sustainable Biosphere Initiative (1991), scientific assessment of ecosystem management (1996), ESA’s vision for the future (2003), Rapid Response Teams that respond to environmental crises (2005), and the Earth Stewardship Initiative (2009). During the past 25 years, ESA launched five new journals, largely reflecting the expansion of scholarship linking ecology with broader societal issues. The goal of the Earth Stewardship Initiative is to raise awareness and to explore ways for ecologists and other scientists to contribute more effectively to the sustainability of our planet. This has occurred through four approaches: (1) articulation of the stewardship concept in ESA publications and Website, (2) selection of meeting themes and symposia, (3) engagement of ESA sections in implementing the initiative, and (4) outreach beyond ecology through collaborations and demonstration projects. Collaborations include societies and groups of Earth and social scientists, practitioners and policy makers, religious and business leaders, federal agencies, and artists and writers. The Earth Stewardship Initiative is a work in progress, so next steps likely include continued nurturing of these emerging collaborations, advancing the development of sustainability and stewardship theory, improving communication of stewardship science, and identifying opportunities for scientists and civil society to take actions that move the Earth toward a more sustainable trajectory.

Book chapter↗