Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Information Services and Use”

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 1,117 records · Page 62Linked to original sources
USGS2017

Assessment of frequency and duration of point counts when surveying for golden eagle presence

We assessed the utility of the recommended golden eagle ( Aquila chrysaetos ) survey methodology in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2013 Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance. We conducted 800-m radius, 1-hr point-count surveys broken into 20-min segments, during 2 sampling periods in 3 areas within the Intermountain West of the United States over 2 consecutive breeding seasons during 2012 and 2013. Our goal was to measure the influence of different survey time intervals and sampling periods on detectability and use estimates of golden eagles among different locations. Our results suggest that a less intensive effort (i.e., survey duration shorter than 1 hr and point-count survey radii smaller than 800 m) would likely be inadequate for rigorous documentation of golden eagle occurrence pre- or postconstruction of wind energy facilities. Results from a simulation analysis of detection probabilities and survey effort suggest that greater temporal and spatial effort could make point-count surveys more applicable for evaluating golden eagle occurrence in survey areas; however, increased effort would increase financial costs associated with additional person-hours and logistics (e.g., fuel, lodging). Future surveys can benefit from a pilot study and careful consideration of prior information about counts or densities of golden eagles in the survey area before developing a survey design. If information is lacking, survey planning may be best served by assuming low detection rates and increasing the temporal and spatial effort.

Idaho, New Mexico, Wyoming↗
USGS2021

Water and sediment chemistry of selected existing and potential habitats of the Mohave tui chub, Mojave National Preserve, California, 2018

The Mohave tui chub ( Siphateles bicolor mohavensis ) was nearly extirpated from the Mojave River drainage in California by the mid-twentieth century and was listed as endangered in 1970. A source population of Mohave tui chub exists at MC Spring in Zzyzx, California, and has been used for several re-establishment efforts in previous decades. Two potential habitats in the Mojave National Preserve with perennial sources of water were identified by the National Park Service as candidates for additional Mohave tui chub re-establishment: West Pond and Rainbow Wells Pond. West Pond, an artificial pond at Zzyzx near MC Spring, contained a population of Mohave tui chub that died off in 1985 because of changes in water quality. The pond was rehabilitated in the past several years through re-excavation and by pumping fresh groundwater into the pond. Rainbow Wells Pond is an abandoned excavated mine site in the Cima Dome area. The bottom of the excavation intersects the water table, forming a pond. In cooperation with the National Park Service, the U.S. Geological Survey monitored water-quality conditions at West Pond and Rainbow Wells Pond for 1 year to characterize the suitability of spring habitat for re-establishment of Mohave tui chub populations. Data were also collected at three existing Mohave tui chub habitats in Mojave National Preserve to provide further information on the range of acceptable physical and chemical conditions. Initial water-quality results at West Pond indicate the pond has similar water quality as existing Mohave tui chub habitats. Initial water-quality results at Rainbow Wells Pond indicate the dissolved oxygen concentrations and springtime water temperatures are less than the long-term tolerable ranges for Mohave tui chub.

California↗
USGS2024

Introduction to recommended capabilities and instrumentation for volcano monitoring in the United States

Introduction The National Volcano Early Warning System (NVEWS) was authorized and partially funded by the U.S. Government in 2019. In response, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Volcano Hazards Program asked its scientists to reflect on and summarize their views of best practices for volcano monitoring. The goal was to review and update the recommendations of a previous report (Moran and others, 2008) and to provide a more detailed analysis of capabilities and instrumentation for monitoring networks for U.S. volcanoes. This Scientific Investigations Report and its chapters reflect those USGS scientists’ views and summaries and will serve as a guide for future network upgrades funded through NVEWS. Given the well-documented hazards posed by volcanoes to population centers and aviation (for example, Blong, 1984; Scott, 1989; Neal and others, 1997, 2019; Guffanti and others, 2010; Shroder and Papale, 2014; Prata and Rose, 2015; Palmer, 2020), volcano monitoring is critical for ensuring public safety and for mitigating the impacts of volcanic activity. Accurate and timely forecasts are facilitated by well-designed monitoring networks that are in place long enough to allow for background behavior to be recognized and understood. Because precursory signals may be limited and unrest may progress rapidly to an eruption, our goal is to deploy monitoring systems that enable detection of the reactivation of dormant volcanoes as early as possible, allowing for public safety and risk mitigation. NVEWS planning is also informed by the results of Ewert and others (2005, 2018), whereby 161 U.S. volcanoes are currently categorized and ranked commensurate with their relative threat. In each chapter, author(s) considered the need for some redundancy of instrumentation and telemetry, given the likelihood of occasional equipment failure, particularly in extreme and remote environments. Establishing digital telemetry networks requires advanced planning, sighting, radio-shot testing, and, inevitably, troubleshooting in the field. This is harder to achieve rapidly during a crisis; thus, an important goal for monitoring U.S. volcanoes is to establish digital telemetry backbones with redundancy and extra capacity to absorb additional instruments should a volcano begin to exhibit signs of unrest (fig. A1). The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) imposed new regulations in the United States, eliminating the use of older analog radios for many purposes, which had been one previous means for redundant data delivery. However, the resulting conversion from analog to digital systems usefully enables stations to accommodate new and multivariate real-time data streams (for example, Global Navigation Satellite System [GNSS] receivers, infrasound arrays, gas spectrometers, visible and infrared cameras, and broadband seismometers). We note that other USGS and broader national and international hazard programs can leverage NVEWS instrumentation plans. Examples of this include the following: Improved seismic coverage of volcanoes will increase the capability of the USGS Earthquake Hazards Program to detect and locate earthquakes, estimate ground shaking, and provide timely early warnings through the ShakeAlert Earthquake Early Warning System (Given and others, 2018). The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Tsunami Program will benefit from additional seismic stations, particularly within the sparsely instrumented Aleutian Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, and American Samoa. Infrasound stations can detect signals from landslides, debris flows and lahars, floods, and weather events, providing benefits to the National Weather Service and the USGS Landslide Hazards Program.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2012

Linking physical monitoring to coho and Chinook salmon populations in the Redwood Creek Watershed, California—Summary of May 3–4, 2012 Workshop

On Thursday, May 3, 2012, a science workshop was held at the Redwood National and State Parks (RNSP) office in Arcata, California, with researchers and resource managers working in RNSP to share data and expert opinions concerning salmon populations and habitat in the Redwood Creek watershed. The focus of the workshop was to discuss how best to synthesize physical and biological data related to the freshwater and estuarine phases of salmon life cycles in order to increase the understanding of constraints on salmon populations. The workshop was hosted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Status and Trends (S&T) Program National Park Monitoring Project ( http://www.fort.usgs.gov/brdscience/ParkMonitoring.htm ), which supports USGS research on priority topics (themes) identified by the National Park Service (NPS) Inventory and Monitoring Program (I&M) and S&T. The NPS has organized more than 270 parks with significant natural resources into 32 Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) Networks ( http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/networks.cfm ) that share funding and core professional staff to monitor the status and long-term trends of selected natural resources ( http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/monitor ). All 32 networks have completed vital signs monitoring plans (available at http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/monitor/MonitoringPlans.cfm ), containing background information on the important resources of each park, conceptual models behind the selection of vital signs for monitoring the condition of natural resources, and the selection of high priority vital signs for monitoring. Vital signs are particular physical, chemical, and biological elements and processes of park ecosystems that represent the overall health or condition of the park, known or hypothesized effects of stressors, or elements that have important human values (Fancy and others, 2009). Beginning in 2009, the I&M program funded projects to analyze and synthesize the biotic and abiotic data generated by vital signs monitoring and previous in-park natural resource monitoring and inventories to provide useful information, models, and tools to park managers for addressing resource management issues. The workshop described in this report is an element of the project funded by USGS NPS-I&M program to conduct a synthesis of salmon-related datasets in the Klamath (KLMN) and San Francisco Bay Area (SFAN) networks of national parks. The synthesis focused on four park units: Redwood National Park (KLMN), Point Reyes National Seashore, Muir Woods National Monument, and Golden Gate National Recreation Area (SFAN).

California↗
USGS1976

Wildlife importation into the United States, 1900-1972

Data from Bureau of Biological Survey and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service reports show an overall increase in the number of birds and mammals imported from 1900 to 1972. The trend was interrupted by World War I, the economic depression of the 1930's, and World War II. Data are lacking for the years after World War II until 1968. Until 1942, domesticated canaries and a few species of game birds made up most of the avian imports; the shell parakeet or budgerigar was the most commonly imported parrot. Although the total number ofbirds imported 1968-72 was-not greatly different from the pre-depression years, the proportion of canaries, game species, and parakeets declined greatly and the variety and number of cage birds including other parrot species greatly increased. Until 1930 most mammals imported were for laboratory use or fur farming. After 1930 the number of imported mammals increased with the growing importance of primates, especially rhesus macaques, in research. Since 1968 the number of mammals irnported annually has been at least 5 times greater than the previous peak of 1938, and primates have made up 87% of mammalian imports. Information on reptiles and amphibians imported into the United States is available only for 1970 and 1971. Turtles were the most commonly imported reptiles, frogs and toads the most commonly imported amphibians.

Special Scientific Report - Wildlife↗
USGS2011

Natural resource mitigation, adaptation and research needs related to climate change in the Great Basin and Mojave Desert

This report synthesizes the knowledge, opinions, and concerns of many Federal and State land managers, scientists, stakeholders, and partners from a workshop, held at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, on April 20-22, 2010. Land managers, research scientists, and resource specialists identified common concerns regarding the potential effects of climate change on public lands and natural resources in the Great Basin and Mojave Desert and developed recommendations for mitigation, adaptation, and research needs. Water and, conversely, the effects of drought emerged as a common theme in all breakout sessions on terrestrial and aquatic species at risk, managing across boundaries, monitoring, and ecosystem services. Climate change models for the southwestern deserts predict general warming and drying with increasing precipitation variability year to year. Scientists noted that under these changing conditions the past may no longer be a guide to the future in which managers envision increasing conflicts between human water uses and sustaining ecosystems. Increasing environmental stress also is expected as a consequence of shifting ecosystem boundaries and species distributions, expansion of non-native species, and decoupling of biotic mutualisms, leading to increasingly unstable biologic communities. Managers uniformly expressed a desire to work across management and agency boundaries at a landscape scale but conceded that conflicting agency missions and budgetary constraints often impede collaboration. More and better science is needed to cope with the effects of climate change but, perhaps even more important is the application of science to management issues using the methods of adaptive management based on long-term monitoring to assess the merits of management actions. Access to data is essential for science-based land management. Basic inventories, spatial databases, baseline condition assessments, data quality assurance, and data sharing were identified as top information priorities by all participants at this workshop. Optimizing the utility of ecosystem monitoring data will require standardizing monitoring protocols across agencies. Better communication among researchers and managers and cooperation through partnerships to manage resources across boundaries were emphasized as necessary for adapting to changing climatic conditions. However, even these strategies may be insufficient unless policy mandates, agency missions, and funding are coordinated at a high level.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2022

What is a biocrust? A refined, contemporary definition for a broadening research community

Studies of biological soil crusts (biocrusts) have proliferated over the last few decades. The biocrust literature has broadened, with more studies assessing and describing the function of a variety of biocrust communities in a broad range of biomes and habitats and across a large spectrum of disciplines, and also by the incorporation of biocrusts into global perspectives and biogeochemical models. As the number of biocrust researchers increases, along with the scope of soil communities defined as ‘biocrust’, it is worth asking whether we all share a clear, universal, and fully articulated definition of what constitutes a biocrust. In this review, we synthesize the literature with the views of new and experienced biocrust researchers, to provide a refined and fully elaborated definition of biocrusts. In doing so, we illustrate the ecological relevance and ecosystem services provided by them. We demonstrate that biocrusts are defined by four distinct elements: physical structure, functional characteristics, habitat, and taxonomic composition. We describe outgroups, which have some, but not all, of the characteristics necessary to be fully consistent with our definition and thus would not be considered biocrusts. We also summarize the wide variety of different types of communities that fall under our definition of biocrusts, in the process of highlighting their global distribution. Finally, we suggest the universal use of the Belnap, Büdel & Lange definition, with minor modifications: Biological soil crusts (biocrusts) result from an intimate association between soil particles and differing proportions of photoautotrophic (e.g. cyanobacteria , algae , lichens , bryophytes) and heterotrophic (e.g. bacteria , fungi , archaea) organisms , which live within , or immediately on top of , the uppermost millimetres of soil. Soil particles are aggregated through the presence and activity of these often extremotolerant biota that desiccate regularly , and the resultant living crust covers the surface of the ground as a coherent layer. With this detailed definition of biocrusts, illustrating their ecological functions and widespread distribution, we hope to stimulate interest in biocrust research and inform various stakeholders (e.g. land managers, land users) on their overall importance to ecosystem and Earth system functioning.

Biological Reviews↗
USGS2015

Potential groundwater recharge for the State of Minnesota using the Soil-Water-Balance model, 1996-2010

Groundwater recharge is one of the most difficult components of a water budget to ascertain, yet is an important boundary condition necessary for the quantification of water resources. In Minnesota, improved estimates of recharge are necessary because approximately 75 percent of drinking water and 90 percent of agricultural irrigation water in Minnesota are supplied from groundwater. The water that is withdrawn must be supplied by some combination of (1) increased recharge, (2) decreased discharge to streams, lakes, and other surface-water bodies, and (3) removal of water that was stored in the system. Recent pressure on groundwater resources has highlighted the need to provide more accurate recharge estimates for various tools that can assess the sustainability of long-term water use. As part of this effort, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, used the Soil-Water-Balance model to calculate gridded estimates of potential groundwater recharge across Minnesota for 1996‒2010 at a 1-kilometer (0.621-mile) resolution. The potential groundwater recharge estimates calculated for Minnesota from the Soil-Water Balance model included gridded values (1-kilometer resolution) of annual mean estimates (that is, the means for individual years from 1996 through 2010) and mean annual estimates (that is, the mean for the 15-year period 1996−2010). The Soil-Water-Balance model uses a modified Thornthwaite-Mather soil-water-balance approach, with components of the soil-water balance calculated on a daily basis. A key advantage of this approach includes the use of commonly available geographic information system data layers that incorporate land cover, soil properties, and daily meteorological data to produce temporally and spatially variable gridded estimates of potential recharge. The Soil-Water-Balance model was calibrated by using a combination of parameter estimation techniques, making manual adjustments of model parameters, and using parameter values from previously published Soil-Water-Balance models. Each calibration simulation compared the potential recharge estimate from the model against base-flow estimates derived from three separate hydrograph separation techniques. A total of 35 Minnesota watersheds were selected for the model calibration. Meteorological data necessary for the model included daily precipitation, minimum daily temperature, and maximum daily temperature. All of the meteorological data were provided by the Daymet dataset, which included daily continuous surfaces of key climatological data. Land-cover data were provided by the 2001 and 2006 National Land Cover Database: the 2001 classification was used from 1994 through 2003, and the 2006 classification was used from 2004 through 2010. Soil data used in the model included hydrologic soils group and the available soil-water capacity. These soil data were obtained from the Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) database and the State Soil Geographic (STATSGO) database. The statewide mean annual potential recharge rate from 1996–2010 was 4.9 inches per year. Potential recharge estimates increased from west to east across Minnesota. The mean annual potential recharge estimates across Minnesota at a 1-km resolution for the overall simulation period (1996–2010) ranged from less than 0.1 to 17.8 inches per year. Some of the lowest potential recharge rates for the simulation period were in the Red River of the North Basin of northwestern Minnesota, and generally were between 1.0 and 1.5 inches per year. The highest potential recharge rates were in northeastern Minnesota and the Anoka Sand Plain in central Minnesota. Eighty-eight percent of the potential recharge rates (by grid cell) were between 2 and 8 inches per year from 1996–2010. Only about 3 percent of all the potential recharge estimates (by grid cell) were less than 2 inches per year, and 9 percent of estimates were greater than 8 inches per year. On an annual basis, however, potential recharge rates were as high as 27.2 inches per year. The highest annual mean recharge estimate across the State was for 2010, and the lowest mean recharge estimate was for 2003. Although precipitation variability partially explained the annual differences in potential recharge estimates, precipitation alone did not account for these differences, and other factors such as antecedent moisture conditions likely were important. Also, because precipitation gradients across the State can vary from year to year, the dominant land-cover class and hydrologic soil group combinations for a particular region had a large effect on the resulting potential recharge value. During 1996–2010, April had the greatest monthly mean potential recharge compared to all other months, accounting for a mean of 30 percent of annual potential recharge in this single month.

Minnesota↗
USGS2012

Potential pollutant sources in a Choptank River (USA) subwatershed and the influence of land use and watershed characteristics

Row-crop and poultry production have been implicated as sources of water pollution along the Choptank River, an estuary and tributary of the Chesapeake Bay. This study examined the effects of land use, subwatershed characteristics, and climatic conditions on the water quality parameters of a subwatershed in the Choptank River watershed. The catchments within the subwatershed were defined using advanced remotely-sensed data and current geographic information system processing techniques. Water and sediment samples were collected in May–October 2009 and April–June 2010 under mostly baseflow conditions and analyzed for select bacteria, nitrate-N, ammonium-N, total arsenic, total phosphorus (TP), orthophosphate (ortho-P), and particle-phase phosphorus (PP); n = 96 for all analytes except for arsenic, n = 136, and for bacteria, n = 89 (aqueous) and 62 (sediment). Detections of Enterococci and Escherichia coli concentrations were ubiquitous in this subwatershed and showed no correlation to location or land use, however larger bacterial counts were observed shortly after precipitation. Nitrate-N concentrations were not correlated with agricultural lands, which may reflect the small change in percent agriculture and/or the similarity of agronomic practices and crops produced between catchments. Concentration data suggested that ammonia emission and possible deposition to surface waters occurred and that these processes may be influenced by local agronomic practices and climatic conditions. The negative correlation of PP and arsenic concentrations with percent forest was explained by the stronger signal of the head waters and overland flow of particulate phase analytes versus dissolved phase inputs from groundwater. Service roadways at some poultry production facilities were found to redirect runoff from the facilities to neighboring catchment areas, which affected water quality parameters. Results suggest that in this subwatershed, catchments with poultry production facilities are possible sources for arsenic and PP as compared to catchment areas where these facilities were not present.

Choptank River↗
USGS2004

Economic analysis of alternative bison and elk management practices on the National Elk Refuge and Grand Teton National Park: A comparison of visitor and household responses

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Park Service (NPS) are preparing a management plan for bison and elk inhabiting the National Elk Refuge (NER) and Grand Teton National Park (GTNP). These animals are part of the bison and elk herds in Jackson Hole, one of the largest concentrations of freeranging bison and elk in the world. A range of alternatives for managing the bison and elk herds in the project area will be developed in an Environmental Impact Statement. The EIS will likely include such issues as habitat management, disease management, winter-feeding and hunting programs related to the NER and GTNP. The purposes of this study are to determine how the current management and EIS alternatives for bison and elk inhabiting the NER and GTNP would change: Visitor use Total visitor expenditures in the local and regional economy Local area employment and income in the local and regional economy Visitor net economic benefits Acceptability of individual elk and bison management practices to visitors and household living in Teton County, rest of Wyoming, and rest of the United States. Assessing public attitudes and economic effects for different EIS alternatives can provide managers with valuable information regarding the advantages and disadvantages of these alternatives. Economic issues such as local job and income effects are often raised by interest groups opposed to changes in current agency management actions. Having objective data on what the job and income impacts are can help to defuse that issue. Survey data on visitor and public preferences is also useful to supplement the traditional public involvement process conducted as part of the EIS process. This is because the survey reaches visitors and a broad geographic array of residents who may not typically participate in the traditional EIS public involvement process. That is, the survey reflects the effort of the EIS planning team reaching out to the public, rather than requiring the public to come to the EIS meeting locations. Attendance at public meetings is often inconvenient for occasional visitors to the NER and GTNP who frequently live long distances from the relevant FWS and NPS offices. It is also inconvenient for residents of states outside the state where the resource is located.

Wyoming↗
USGS1965

Vigil Network sites: A sample of data for permanent filing

The Vigil Network consists of places where observations are made through time to record changes in landscape features over a long period. Resurveys will usually be made once each year or every few years and the period of observation, hopefully, will extend through and beyond the International Hydrological Decade. Vigil Network sites will usually be chosen to represent some typical feature of a given landscape. In the example shown here, the feature is a small ephemeral channel in a basin of moderate relief underlain by silty sandstone typical of the surrounding area. Vigil sites are not protected from man's influence and indeed may be selected because of the possible or portending cultural influences. In this respect they differ from the Bench Mark Network whose purpose is to make precise observations of hydrologic factors in areas uninfluenced by and protected from man's use. The factors which might be observed are many and varied. A few might be mentioned here, others are explained at length elsewhere (Miller and Leopold, 1963; Leopold, 1962). Streamchannel position, form, depth, and profile; vegetation in form of transects or quadrats; soil movement on slopes; rock movement on slopes or in channels. These and many more would yield valuable information on changes with time. To assure permanence of initial field observations, including reference points, bench marks, and cross sections, brief descriptions, maps, and initial data should be filed identically in designated repositories where the data will be made available for inspection by any interested scientist. It is recommended that the designation of two such locations where records of the type here attached will be filed be taken up by the Coordinating Council of the International Hydrological Decade. In designating such repositories it should be recognized that there is no need for elaborate indexing. The main requirement is merely the maintenance of a simple file where the data are stored and can be inspected or copied by any scientist. There need be no special provision for lending or reproduction services. The present document is an example showing what data, maps, and descriptions should be included in those permanent files at the two repositories. The material in these repositories should be sufficient to permit someone in the indefinite future to find and remeasure the same features described now. Thus the scientific value of the original surveys increases with time, - provided that the descriptions are sufficient to allow a person to find with assurance the original feature in the field. It must be visualized that a permanent repository must economize in space. Thus, as the example here shows, the filed material is not all of the original field notes but a summary, brief but descriptive.

International Association of Scientific Hydrology ↗
USGS2017

Interactive effects of water temperature and salinity on growth and mortality of eastern oysters, Crassostrea virginica: A meta-analysis using 40 years of monitoring data

Despite nearly a century of exploitation and scientific study, predicting growth and mortality rates of the eastern oyster ( Crassostrea virginica ) as a means to inform local harvest and management activities remains difficult. Ensuring that models reflect local population responses to varying salinity and temperature combinations requires locally appropriate models. Using long-term (1988 to 2015) monitoring data from Louisiana's public oyster reefs, we develop regionally specific models of temperature- and salinity-driven mortality (sack oysters only) and growth for spat (<25 mm), seed (25–75 mm), and sack (>75 mm) oyster size classes. The results demonstrate that the optimal combination of temperature and salinity where Louisiana oysters experience reduced mortality and fast growth rates is skewed toward lower salinities and higher water temperatures than previous models have suggested. Outside of that optimal range, oysters are commonly exposed to combinations of temperature and salinity that are correlated with high mortality and reduced growth. How these combinations affect growth, and to a lesser degree mortality, appears to be size class dependent. Given current climate predictions for the region and ongoing large-scale restoration activities in coastal Louisiana, the growth and mortality models are a critical step toward ensuring sustainable oyster reefs for long-term harvest and continued delivery of the ecological services in a changing environment.

Louisiana↗
USGS1979

1980 water quality laboratory services catalog

The information in this catalog is provided to assist Water Resources Division personnel in the selection of analytical determinations, estimation of cost, calculation of sample volume requirements, identification of the necessary sample treatment, and selection of laboratory precision for samples to be submitted to Central Laboratories. The catalog contains 18 tables. Tables 1-4 are arranged alphabetically by constituent or schedule, and where available, include parameter name, unit of measurement, lab code or schedule code, applicable range and precision of the method, parameter code, method number and name, and a page index. Tables 1 and 2 list inorganic and organic constituents determined in water samples, table 3 provides information on determinations of chemical and physical properties of sediments, and table 4 lists biological determinations. Page references in these first four tables refer to the tables of determinations (tables 5 through 8) or to the tables of calculations (tables 9 through 12). Constituents that are found in more than one category are cross-referenced (e.g. nitrogen, organic is found in the inorganic table and is cross indexed in the organic table). Tables 13 through 16 list sample containers, sample preservations, and sample designations for each determination. Table 17 lists materials (bottles, preservatives, standardized solutions, and so forth) which may be purchased from the Central Laboratories. Table 18 lists agency codes which can be used to indicate the agency collecting or analyzing samples. Although the catalog is being released now, its effective date is September 11, 1979 to September 10, 1980. The early release is for program planning only.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2017

Quantitative tools for implementing the new definition of significant portion of the range in the U.S. Endangered Species Act

In 2014, the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service announced a new policy interpretation for the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA). According to the act, a species must be listed as threatened or endangered if it is determined to be threatened or endangered in a significant portion of its range (SPR). The 2014 policy seeks to provide consistency by establishing that a portion of the range should be considered significant if the associated individuals’ “removal would cause the entire species to become endangered or threatened.” We reviewed 20 quantitative techniques used to assess whether a portion of a species’ range is significant according to the new guidance. Our assessments are based on the 3R criteria—redundancy (i.e., buffering from catastrophe), resiliency (i.e., ability to withstand stochasticity), and representation (i.e., ability to evolve)—that the FWS uses to determine if a species merits listing. We identified data needs for each quantitative technique and considered which methods could be implemented given the data limitations typical of rare species. We also identified proxies for the 3Rs that may be used with limited data. To assess potential data availability, we evaluated 7 example species by accessing data in their species status assessments, which document all the information used during a listing decision. In all species, an SPR could be evaluated with at least one metric for each of the 3Rs robustly or with substantial assumptions. Resiliency assessments appeared most constrained by limited data, and many species lacked information on connectivity between subpopulations, genetic variation, and spatial variability in vital rates. These data gaps will likely make SPR assessments for species with complex life histories or that cross national boundaries difficult. Although we reviewed techniques for the ESA, other countries require identification of significant areas and could benefit from this research.

Conservation Biology↗
USGS2008

Archive of digitized analog boomer seismic reflection data collected from Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana, to Mobile Bay, Alabama, during cruises onboard the R/V ERDA-1, June and August 1992

In June and August of 1992, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducted geophysical surveys to investigate the shallow geologic framework from Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana, to Mobile Bay, Alabama. This work was conducted onboard the Argonne National Laboratory's R/V ERDA-1 as part of the Mississippi/Alabama Pollution Project. This report is part of a series to digitally archive the legacy analog data collected from the Mississippi-Alabama SHelf (MASH). The MASH data rescue project is a cooperative effort by the USGS and the Minerals Management Service (MMS). A standardized naming convention was established to allow for better management of scanned trackline images within the MASH data rescue project. Each cruise received a unique field activity ID based on the year the data were collected, the first two digits of the survey vessel name, and the number of cruises made (to date) by that vessel that year (i.e. 92ER2 represents the second cruise made by the R/V ERDA-1 in 1992.) The new field activity IDs 92ER2 and 92ER4 presented in this report were originally referred to as ERDA 92-2 and ERDA 92-4 at the USGS in St. Petersburg, FL, and 92010 and 92037 at the USGS in Woods Hole, MA. A table showing the naming convention lineage for cruise IDs in the MASH data rescue series is included as a PDF. This report serves as an archive of high resolution scanned Tagged Image File Format (TIFF) and Graphics Interchange Format (GIF) images of the original boomer paper records, navigation files, trackline maps, Geographic Information System (GIS) files, cruise logs, and formal Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) metadata for cruises 92ER2 and 92ER4. The boomer system uses an acoustic energy source called a plate, which consists of capacitors charged to a high voltage and discharged through a transducer in the water. The source is towed on a sled, at sea level, and when discharged emits a short acoustic pulse, or shot, which propagates through the water and sediment column. The acoustic energy is reflected at density boundaries (such as the seafloor or sediment layers beneath the seafloor), detected by the hydrophone receiver, and the amplitude of the reflected energy is recorded by an Edward P. Curley Lab (EPC) thermal plotter. This process is repeated at timed intervals (for example, 0.5 s) and recorded for specific intervals of time (for example, 100 ms). The timed intervals are also referred to as the shot interval or fire rate. On analog records, the recorded interval is referred to as the sweep, which is the amount of time the recorder stylus takes to sweep from the top of the record to the bottom of the record, thereby recording the amplitude of the reflected energy of one shot. In this way, consecutive recorded shots produce a two-dimensional (2-D) vertical image of the shallow geologic structure beneath the ship track. Many of the geophysical data collected by the USGS prior to the late 1990s were recorded in analog format and stored as paper copies. Scientists onboard made hand-written annotations onto these records to note latitude and longitude, time, line number, course heading, and geographic points of reference. Each paper roll typically contained numerous survey lines and could reach more than 90 ft in length. All rolls are stored at the USGS FISC-St. Petersburg, FL. To preserve the integrity of these records and improve accessibility, analog holdings were converted to digital files.

Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi↗
USGS2014

Evaluation and prioritization of stream habitat monitoring in the Lower Columbia Salmon and Steelhead Recovery Domain as related to the habitat monitoring needs of ESA recovery plans

The lower Columbia River and its tributaries once supported abundant runs of salmon and steelhead; however, there are five species currently listed under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). The National Marine Fisheries Service has completed, and is proposing for adoption, a comprehensive ESA Recovery Plan for the Lower Columbia Evolutionarily Significant Units (ESUs) based on the recovery plans developed by Oregon and Washington. One of the primary factors attributed to the decline of these species is habitat degradation. There are numerous entities conducting status and/or trends monitoring of instream habitat in the lower Columbia River Basin, but because the programs were developed for agency specific reasons, the existing monitoring efforts are not well coordinated, and often lack the spatial coverage, certainty, or species coverage necessary to answer questions related to status and trends of the ESA listed populations. The Pacific Northwest Aquatic Monitoring Partnership’s Integrated Status and Trends Monitoring (ISTM) project was initiated to improve integration of existing and new monitoring efforts by developing recommendations for sampling frames, protocols, and data sharing. In an effort to meet the ISTM project goals, five objectives were identified: (1) identify and prioritize decisions, questions, and monitoring objectives, (2) evaluate how existing programs align with these management decisions, questions, and objectives, (3) identify the most appropriate monitoring design to inform priority management decisions, questions, and objectives, (4) use trade-off analysis to develop specific recommendations for monitoring based on outcomes of Objectives 1-3 and (5) recommend implementation and reporting mechanisms. This report summarizes the effort to address Objectives 1 and 2, detailing the commonalities among the habitat characteristics that all entities measure and monitor, and how the metrics align with the priorities listed in the comprehensive recovery plan for the Lower Columbia ESUs.

Report↗
USGS2003

A Framework for Long-term Ecological Monitoring in Olympic National Park: Prototype for the Coniferous Forest Biome

This report is the result of a five-year collaboration between scientists of the U.S. Geological Survey Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center, Olympic Field Station, and the natural resources staff of Olympic National Park to develop a comprehensive strategy for monitoring natural resources of Olympic National Park. Olympic National Park is the National Park Serviceʼs prototype monitoring park, representing parks in the coniferous forest biome. Under the umbrella of the National Park Serviceʼs prototype parks program, U.S. Geological Survey and Olympic National Park staffs are obligated to: develop strategies and designs for monitoring the long-term health and integrity of national park ecosystems with a significant coniferous forest component. design exportable monitoring protocols that can be used by other parks within the coniferous forest biome (i.e., parks having similar environments), and create a demonstration area and ʻcenter of excellenceʼ for assisting other parks in developing ecological monitoring programs. Olympic National Park is part of the North Coast and Cascades Network, a network of seven Pacific Northwestern park units created recently by the National Park Serviceʼs Inventory and Monitoring Program to extend the monitoring of ʻvital signsʼ of park health to all National Park Service units. It is our intent and hope that the monitoring strategies and conceptual models described here will meet the overall purpose of the prototype parks monitoring program in proving useful not only to Olympic National Park, but also to parks within the North Coast and Cascades Network and elsewhere. Part I contains the conceptual design and sampling framework for the prototype long-term monitoring program in Olympic National Park. In this section, we explore key elements of monitoring design that help to ensure the spatial, ecological, and temporal integration of monitoring program elements and discuss approaches used to design an ecosystem-based monitoring program. Basic monitoring components include ecosystem drivers, (e.g., climate, atmospheric inputs, human pressures), indicators of ecosystem integrity (e.g., biogeochemical indicators), known threats (e.g., impacts of introduced mountain goats), and focal or ʻkeyʼ species (e.g., rare or listed species, Roosevelt elk). Monitoring system drivers and key indicators of ecosystem integrity provide the long-term baseline needed to judge what constitutes ʻunnaturalʼ variation in park resources and provide the earliest possible warning of unacceptable change. Monitoring effects of known threats and the status of focal species will provide information useful to park managers for dealing with current park issues. In Part I we describe the process of identifying potential indicators of ecological condition and present conceptual models of park ecosystems. In addition we report results from several workshops held in conjunction with Olympic National Park aimed at identifying potential indicators of change in the parkʼs ecosystem. First, we describe the responses of Olympic National Park staff to the generic question, “What is the most important resource to monitor in Olympic National Park and why?” followed by the responses from resource and land managers from areas adjoining the park. We also catalogue the responses of various expert groups that we asked to help identify the most appropriate system drivers and indicators of change in the Olympic National Park ecosystems. Results of the workshops provided the justification for selecting basic indicators of ecosystem integrity, effects of current threats to park resources, and focal resources of parks to detect both the currently evident and unforeseeable changes in park resources. We conclude Part I by exploring several generic statistical issues relevant to monitoring natural resources in Olympic National Park. Specifically we discuss trade-offs associated with sampling extensively versus sampling intensively in smaller geographic regions and describe a conceptual framework to guide development of a generic sampling frame for monitoring. We recommend partitioning Olympic National Park into three zones of decreasing accessibility to maximize monitoring efficiency. We present examples of how the generic sampling frame could be used to help ensure spatial integration of individual monitoring projects. Part II of the report is a record of the potential monitoring questions and indicators identified to date in our workshops. The presentation is organized according to the major system drivers, components, and processes identified in the intermediate-level working model of the Olympic National Park ecosystem. For each component of the park system, we develop the need and justification for monitoring, articulate park management issues, and describe key resources and ecosystem functions. We also present a pictorial conceptual model of each ecological subsystem, identify monitoring questions, and list potential indicators for each monitoring question. We conclude each section by identifying linkages of indicators to other ecological subsystems in our general ecosystem model, spatial and temporal contexts for monitoring (where and how often to monitor), and research and development needs. Part II represents the most current detailed listing of potential indicators—the material for subsequent discussions of monitoring priorities and selection of indicators for protocol development. Collectively, the sections of this report contain a comprehensive list of the important monitoring questions and potential indicators as well as recommendations for designing an integrated monitoring program. In Part I, Chapter 6 we provide recommendations on how to proceed with the important next steps in the design process: establishing priorities among the many possible monitoring questions and indicators, and beginning to research and design effective long-term monitoring protocols.

Information and Technology Report↗
USGS2007

Climate variation at Flagstaff, Arizona - 1950 to 2007

Much scientific research demonstrates the existence of recent climate variation, particularly global warming. Climate prediction models forecast that climate will change; it will become warmer, droughts will increase in number and severity, and extreme climate events will recur often—desiccating aridity, extremely wet, unusually warm, or even frigid at times. However, the global models apply to average conditions in large grids approximately 150 miles on an edge (Thorpe, 2005), and how or whether specific areas within a grid are affected is unclear. Flagstaff's climate is mentioned in the context of global change, but information is lacking on the amount and trend of changes in precipitation, snowfall, and temperature. The purpose of this report is to understand what may be happening to Flagstaff's climate by reviewing local climate history. Flagstaff is in north-central Arizona south of San Francisco Mountain, which reaches 12,633 feet, the highest in Arizona (fig. 1). At 6,900 feet, surrounded by ponderosa pine forest, Flagstaff enjoys a four-season climate; winter-daytime temperatures are cool, averaging 45 degrees (Fahrenheit). Summer-daytime temperatures are comfortable, averaging 80 degrees, which is pleasant compared with nearby low-elevation deserts. Flagstaff's precipitation averages 22-inches per year with a range of 9 to 39 inches. Snowfall occurs each season, averaging 97 inches annually. This report, written for the non-technical reader, interprets climate variation at Flagstaff as observed at the National Weather Service (NWS) station at Pulliam Field (or Airport), a first-order weather station staffed by meteorologists (Staudenmaier and others, 2007). The station is on a flat-topped ridge surrounded by forest 5-miles south of Flagstaff at an elevation of 7,003 feet. Data used in this analysis are daily measurements of precipitation (including snowfall) and temperature (maximum and minimum) covering the period from 1950, when the station began operation, through spring 2007. Conversations with Byron Peterson and Michael Staudenmaier of the NWS helped us understand the difficulties of collecting consistent weather data, operation of the station, and Flagstaff's climate. Weather is the daily or even instantaneous state of temperature and precipitation. Climate is the average or accumulation of these parameters over longer time scales such as a week, month, or year. Seasonal (winter, spring, summer, and fall) and annual averages of temperature and accumulated precipitation describe the temporal variation of Flagstaff's climate, which is shown graphically with time series (figs. 2, 4, 6, 8-15). These plots show precipitation or temperature on the ordinate plotted against time on the abscissa, which is a year for annually repeating data or the year of a particular season. The plots reveal changing patterns of precipitation and temperature related to droughts, wet episodes, and rising temperatures.

Arizona↗