Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Management Science”

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 1,297 records · Page 72Linked to original sources
USGS2019

Corrigendum to “A comprehensive analysis of interseasonal and interannual energy and water balance dynamics in semiarid shrubland and forest ecosystems” [Sci. Total Environ. 651 (2019) 381–398]

The authors regret the omission of an author, funding sources, and key support staff. The omitted author and their affiliation is: Matthew J Germino US Geological Survey, Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center, Boise ID 83706. The correct citation should be: Valayamkunnath, P., Sridhar, V., Zhao, W. Allen, R.G., and Germino, M.J., 2019. A comprehensive analysis of interseasonal and interannual energy and water balance dynamics in semiarid shrubland and forest ecosystems. Science of The Total Environment, 651, 381–398. Additions to the Acknowledgements include: Funding was provided by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management and US Department of Agriculture National Research Initiative. Jeremy Greth, Clarence Robinson, Ricardo Trezza, Jeppe Kjaersgaard, and many other field technicians from Idaho State University and Boise State University assisted in setting up the experiment. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Science of the Total Environment↗
USGS2016

The conservation genetics juggling act: Integrating genetics and ecology, science and policy

The field of conservation genetics, when properly implemented, is a constant juggling act integrating molecular genetics, ecology, and demography with applied aspects concerning managing declining species or implementing conservation laws and policies. This young field has grown substantially since the 1980’s following development of the polymerase chain reaction and now into the genomics era. Our lab has “grown up” with the field, having worked on these issues for over three decades. Our multi-disciplinary approach entails understanding the behavior and ecology of species as well as the underlying processes that contribute to genetic viability. Taking this holistic approach provides a comprehensive understanding of factors that influence species persistence and evolutionary potential while considering annual challenges that occur throughout their life cycle. As a federal lab, we are often addressing the needs of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in their efforts to list, de-list or recover species. Nevertheless, there remains an overall communication gap between research geneticists and biologists who are charged with implementing their results. Therefore, we outline the need for a National Center for Small Population Biology to ameliorate this problem and provide organizations charged with making status decisions firmer ground from which to make their critical decisions.

Evolutionary Applications↗
USGS2009

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Western Region: Coastal and Ocean Science

USGS Western Region Coastal and Ocean Science is interdisciplinary, collaborative, and integrates expertise from all USGS Disciplines, and ten of its major Science Centers, in Alaska, Hawai'i, California, Washington, and Oregon. The scientific talent, laboratories, and research vessels in the Western Region and across the Nation, strategically position the USGS to address broad geographic and oceanographic research topics. USGS information products inform resource managers and policy makers who must balance conservation mandates with increasing demands for resources that sustain the Nation's economy. This fact sheet describes but a few examples of the breadth of USGS science conducted in coastal, nearshore, and ocean environments along our Nation's West Coast and Pacific Islands.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2023

Pacific coastal and marine science of the U.S. Geological Survey in Santa Cruz, California

Introduction The Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center is one of three U.S. Geological Survey science centers that serve the mission of the Coastal and Marine Hazards and Resources Program, the primary Federal marine geology and physical science research program focused on the Nation’s coastal and marine landscape. Our portfolio of coastal and marine projects in the Pacific Ocean provides the scientific information necessary to sustainably manage coastal and marine resources, to prepare for natural hazard events such as landslides and tsunamis, and to build resilience in coastal communities vulnerable to the effects of climate change, as well as storms, flooding, and risks to groundwater resources. The Nation’s demand for societally relevant coastal and marine science has never been greater, and we invite you to explore some of our ongoing Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center activities in these pages.

General Information Product↗
USGS2021

Science needs of southeastern grassland species of conservation concern: A framework for species status assessments

The unglaciated southeastern United States is a biodiversity hotspot, with a disproportionate amount of this biodiversity concentrated in grasslands. Like most hotspots, the Southeast is also threatened by human activities, with the total reduction of southeastern grasslands estimated as 90 percent (upwards to 100 percent for some types) and with many threats escalating today. This report summarizes the results of a multistakeholder workshop organized by the Southeastern Grasslands Initiative and the U.S. Geological Survey, held in January 2020 to provide a scientific needs assessment to help inform the Species Status Assessment (SSA) process under the U.S. Endangered Species Act, with a focus on grassland species and communities of conservation concern in the southeastern United States. This report reviews the ecology of southeastern grasslands, including influences on their origin, maintenance, and high species richness and endemism; presents findings from the workshop; and discusses science questions, hypotheses, and possibilities for future research projects to help fill key knowledge gaps. Participants in the January 2020 workshop, representing diverse expertise in various topics in southeastern grassland ecology, were tasked with identifying major threats to grassland species in the Southeast as well as potential ways to make the SSA process more efficient and effective. An underlying assumption and starting place for workshop discussion was that an ecosystem-based approach to the SSA process is more cost-efficient than a species-by-species approach, in large part because many species with similar biological requirements can be addressed by the same actions. Nevertheless, one partner in this effort, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, does require specific attention be given to taxa that have been petitioned for Federal listing, though as often as possible these taxa are considered alongside a larger group of priority taxa with an ecosystem approach. For group discussions, workshop participants followed a modified “World Café” method, a structured conversational approach for knowledge sharing. Group discussions focused on five categories of threats to grassland communities and species: (1) habitat loss, fragmentation, and disruption of functional population connectivity; (2) climate change, especially changes in temperature and precipitation, including intensity and seasonality, and impacts on soil moisture, groundwater levels, and other ecosystem parameters; (3) changes to disturbance regimes, as influenced by climate and land-use change, extinctions, and human attitudes and behaviors; (4) invasive species (not limited to nonnative species); and (5) localized or subregional impacts such as sea-level rise. In addition to group discussions, workshop participants—as well as other grassland experts who were unable to attend the workshop—completed a preworkshop survey concerning challenges and opportunities for grassland conservation. Findings reported here under each of these topics represent ideas, problems, hypotheses, and questions identified by a diverse community of grassland managers and researchers which may be addressed by future research and monitoring in southeastern grassland ecosystems to help guide science-based conservation of grassland-dependent species.

Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Lou↗
USGS2013

Challenge theme 2: assuring water availability and quality in the 21st century: Chapter 4 in United States-Mexican Borderlands: Facing tomorrow's challenges through USGS science

Along the United States–Mexican border, the health of communities, economies, and ecosystems is inextricably intertwined with the availability and quality of water, but effective water management in the Borderlands is complicated. Water users compete for resources, and their needs are increasing. Managers are faced with issues such as finding a balance between agriculture and rapidly growing cities or maintaining public supplies while ensuring sufficient resources for aquatic ecosystems. In addition to human factors, the dry climate of the Borderlands, as compared to more temperate regions, also increases the challenge of balancing water supplies between humans and ecosystems. Warmer, drier, and more variable conditions across the southwestern United States—the projected results of climate change (Seager and others, 2007)—would further stress water supplies.

United States-Mexico Borderlands↗
USGS2024

Wildlife health capacity enhancement in Thailand through the World Organisation for Animal Health Twinning Program

There is an increasing need for robust wildlife health programs that provide surveillance and management for diseases in wildlife and wild aquatic populations to manage associated risks. This paper illustrates the value of a systematic method to enhancing wildlife health programs. The U.S. Geological Survey and Mahidol University, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Thailand National Wildlife Health Center formally twinned under the auspices of the World Organisation for Animal Health to enhance wildlife health capacity in Thailand and the Southeast Asia Region. We used a system-wide approach to holistically and interdependently enhance capacity. The project commenced with a wildlife health program needs assessment, and capacity enhancement focused on strengthening the general wildlife health surveillance network and improving wildlife health information management. Activities included partner surveys, interactive and didactic workshops, and individual personnel training. Topics included development of wildlife health information management systems, analysis of the current surveillance network, development of a Theory of Change for a strengthened surveillance network, planning workshops to create a wildlife health network, training on wildlife disease outbreak investigation and field sample collection, leading networks, and individual training on bioinformatics and laboratory techniques. Engagement of stakeholders at all levels, continuous communication throughout the project, use of both strategic planning tools and pedagogical methods, and using iterative and adaptive approaches, were key factors to the success of this project.

Frontiers in Veterinary Science↗
USGS2013

Archive of U.S. Geological Survey selected single-beam bathymetry datasets, 1969-2000

New national programs, as well as natural and man-made disasters, have raised awareness about the need to find new and improved ways to share information about the coastal and marine environment with a wide-ranging public audience. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Coastal and Marine Geology Program (CMGP) has begun a large-scale effort to incorporate the program's published, digital geophysical data into a single point of access known as the Coastal and Marine Geoscience Data System (CMGDS) (http://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/). To aid in data discovery, work is also being done to import CMGP data into highly visible data and information resources, such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) and two widely used Earth-science tools, GeoMapApp (GMA) (http://www.geomapapp.org) and Virtual Ocean (VO) (http://www.virtualocean.org/). This task of the CMGP Integrated Data Management System project will help support information exchange with partners, regional planning groups, and the public, as well as facilitate integrated spatial-data analysis. Sharing USGS-CMGP geophysical data via CMGDS, NGDC, GMA, and VO will aid data discovery and enable the data to support new purposes beyond those for which the data were originally intended. In order to make data available to NGDC, and from there into GMA and VO, the data must be reformatted into a standard exchange format and published. In 1977, a group of geophysical data managers from the public and private sectors developed the MGD77 format as the standard exchange format for geophysical data. In 2010, a tab-delimited version of the format was added as MGD77T (Hittelman and others, 1977). The MGD77T geophysical data format can include bathymetry, magnetics, gravity, and seismic navigation data. It is used for the transmission of data between marine institutions, data centers, and can be used by various software programs as an exchange format. A header (documentation) file and data file are created for each survey (Hittelman and others, 1977). More details about the MGD77T format are available at http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/dat/geodas/docs/mgd77.pdf (74MB PDF). This archive describes the detailed steps used to convert single-beam bathymetry and navigation files into the MGD77T format (Hittelman and others, 1977) for submission to NGDC and formal Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) (http://www.fgdc.gov/metadata) metadata as a publication of these single-beam bathymetry datasets.

Data Series↗
USGS2009

Science-Based Strategies for Sustaining Coral Ecosystems

Coral ecosystems and their natural capital are at risk. Greenhouse gas emissions, overfishing, and harmful land-use practices are damaging our coral reefs. Overwhelming scientific evidence indicates that the threats are serious, and if they are left unchecked, the ecological and social consequences will be significant and widespread. Although the primary stressors to coral ecosystems are known, science-based strategies are needed to more accurately explain natural processes and forecast human-induced change. Collaborations among managers and scientists and enhanced mapping, monitoring, research, and modeling can lead to effective mitigation plans. U.S. Geological Survey scientists and their partners assess coral ecosystem history, ecology, vulnerability, and resiliency and provide study results to decisionmakers who may devise policies to sustain coral resources and the essential goods and services they provide.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2018

National Satellite Land Remote Sensing Data Archive

The National Satellite Land Remote Sensing Data Archive is managed on behalf of the Secretary of the Interior by the U.S. Geological Survey’s Earth Resources Observation and Science Center. The Land Remote Sensing Policy Act of 1992 (51 U.S.C. §601) directed the U.S. Department of the Interior to establish a permanent global archive consisting of imagery over land areas obtained from satellites orbiting the Earth. The law also directed the U.S. Department of the Interior, delegated to the U.S. Geological Survey, to ensure proper storage and preservation of imagery, and timely access for all parties. Since 2008, these images have been available at no cost to the user.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2020

Hydrologic monitoring networks in the Death Valley Regional Flow System, Nye County, Nevada and Inyo County, California

Introduction Water is an important resource in the arid southwest region of the United States where there is a limited supply of surface water and groundwater. In the Death Valley regional groundwater flow system (DVRFS) in southern Nevada and eastern California, groundwater is the main source of supply for agricultural, commercial, and domestic water needs. For over four decades, the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Nevada Water Science Center (NVWSC) has assisted environmental programs with the collection of hydrologic information within the DVRFS. Three hydrologic networks, managed in cooperation with local (Nye County, Nev., and Inyo County, Calif.) and federal (Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, U.S. Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration) agencies, are used to actively monitor wells and springs in the region.

California, Nevada↗
USGS2006

Scoping of flood hazard mapping needs for Cumberland County, Maine

This report was prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Maine Water Science Center as the deliverable for scoping of flood hazard mapping needs for Cumberland County, Maine, under Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Inter-Agency Agreement Number HSFE01-05-X-0018. This section of the report explains the objective of the task and the purpose of the report. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) developed a plan in 1997 to modernize the FEMA flood mapping program. FEMA flood maps delineate flood hazard areas in support of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). FEMA's plan outlined the steps necessary to update FEMA's flood maps for the nation to a seamless digital format and streamline FEMA's operations in raising public awareness of the importance of the maps and responding to requests to revise them. The modernization of flood maps involves conversion of existing information to digital format and integration of improved flood hazard data as needed. To determine flood mapping modernization needs, FEMA has established specific scoping activities to be done on a county-by-county basis for identifying and prioritizing requisite flood-mapping activities for map modernization. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with FEMA and the Maine State Planning Office Floodplain Management Program, began scoping work in 2005 for Cumberland County. Scoping activities included assembling existing data and map needs information for communities in Cumberland County, documentation of data, contacts, community meetings, and prioritized mapping needs in a final scoping report (this document), and updating the Mapping Needs Update Support System (MNUSS) Database or its successor with information gathered during the scoping process. The average age of the FEMA floodplain maps in Cumberland County, Maine is 21 years. Most of these studies were in the early to mid 1980s. However, in the ensuing 20-25 years, development has occurred in many of the watersheds, and the characteristics of the watersheds have changed with time. Therefore, many of the older studies may not depict current conditions nor accurately estimate risk in terms of flood heights. The following is the scope of work as defined in the FEMA/USGS Statement of Work: Task 1: Collect data from a variety of sources including community surveys, other Federal and State Agencies, National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) State Coordinators, Community Assistance Visits (CAVs) and FEMA archives. Lists of mapping needs will be obtained from the MNUSS database, community surveys, and CAVs, if available. FEMA archives will be inventoried for effective FIRM panels, FIS reports, and other flood-hazard data or existing study data. Best available base map information, topographic data, flood-hazard data, and hydrologic and hydraulic data will be identified. Data from the Maine Floodplain Management Program database also will be utilized. Task 2: Contact communities in Cumberland County to notify them that FEMA and the State have selected them for a map update, and that a project scope will be developed with their input. Topics to be reviewed with the communities include (1) Purpose of the Flood Map Project (for example, the update needs that have prompted the map update); (2) The community's mapping needs; (3) The community's available mapping, hydrologic, hydraulic, and flooding information; (4) target schedule for completing the project; and (5) The community's engineering, planning, and geographic information system (GIS) capabilities. On the basis of the collected information from Task 1 and community contacts/meetings in Task 2, the USGS will develop a Draft Project Scope for the identified mapping needs of the communities in Cumberland County. The following items will be addressed in the Draft Project Scope: review of available information, determine if and how effective FIS data can be used in new project, and identify other data needed to

Open-File Report↗
USGS2006

Scoping of flood hazard mapping needs for Kennebec County, Maine

This report was prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Maine Water Science Center as the deliverable for scoping of flood hazard mapping needs for Kennebec County, Maine, under Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Inter-Agency Agreement Number HSFE01-05-X-0018. This section of the report explains the objective of the task and the purpose of the report. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) developed a plan in 1997 to modernize the FEMA flood mapping program. FEMA flood maps delineate flood hazard areas in support of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). FEMA's plan outlined the steps necessary to update FEMA's flood maps for the nation to a seamless digital format and streamline FEMA's operations in raising public awareness of the importance of the maps and responding to requests to revise them. The modernization of flood maps involves conversion of existing information to digital format and integration of improved flood hazard data as needed. To determine flood mapping modernization needs, FEMA has established specific scoping activities to be done on a county-by-county basis for identifying and prioritizing requisite flood-mapping activities for map modernization. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with FEMA and the Maine State Planning Office Floodplain Management Program, began scoping work in 2005 for Kennebec County. Scoping activities included assembling existing data and map needs information for communities in Kennebec County (efforts were made to not duplicate those of pre-scoping completed in March 2005), documentation of data, contacts, community meetings, and prioritized mapping needs in a final scoping report (this document), and updating the Mapping Needs Update Support System (MNUSS) Database or its successor with information gathered during the scoping process. The average age of the FEMA floodplain maps in Kennebec County, Maine is 16 years. Most of these studies were in the late 1970's to the mid 1980s. However, in the ensuing 20-30 years, development has occurred in many of the watersheds, and the characteristics of the watersheds have changed with time. Therefore, many of the older studies may not depict current conditions nor accurately estimate risk in terms of flood heights. The following is the scope of work as defined in the FEMA/USGS Statement of Work: Task 1: Collect data from a variety of sources including community surveys, other Federal and State Agencies, National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) State Coordinators, Community Assistance Visits (CAVs) and FEMA archives. Lists of mapping needs will be obtained from the MNUSS database, community surveys, and CAVs, if available. FEMA archives will be inventoried for effective FIRM panels, FIS reports, and other flood-hazard data or existing study data. Best available base map information, topographic data, flood-hazard data, and hydrologic and hydraulic data will be identified. Data from the Maine Floodplain Management Program database also will be utilized. Task 2: Contact communities in Kennebec County to notify them that FEMA and the State have selected them for a map update, and that a project scope will be developed with their input. Topics to be reviewed with the communities include (1) Purpose of the Flood Map Project (for example, the update needs that have prompted the map update); (2) The community's mapping needs; (3) The community's available mapping, hydrologic, hydraulic, and flooding information; (4) target schedule for completing the project; and (5) The community's engineering, planning, and geographic information system (GIS) capabilities. On the basis of the collected information from Task 1 and community contacts/meetings in Task 2, the USGS will develop a Draft Project Scope for the identified mapping needs of the communities in Kennebec County. The following items will be addressed in the Draft Project Scope: review of available information, determine if and how e

Open-File Report↗
USGS2006

Scoping of flood hazard mapping needs for Somerset County, Maine

This report was prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Maine Water Science Center as the deliverable for scoping of flood hazard mapping needs for Somerset County, Maine, under Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Inter-Agency Agreement Number HSFE01-05-X-0018. This section of the report explains the objective of the task and the purpose of the report. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) developed a plan in 1997 to modernize the FEMA flood mapping program. FEMA flood maps delineate flood hazard areas in support of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). FEMA's plan outlined the steps necessary to update FEMA's flood maps for the nation to a seamless digital format and streamline FEMA's operations in raising public awareness of the importance of the maps and responding to requests to revise them. The modernization of flood maps involves conversion of existing information to digital format and integration of improved flood hazard data as needed. To determine flood mapping modernization needs, FEMA has established specific scoping activities to be done on a county-by-county basis for identifying and prioritizing requisite flood-mapping activities for map modernization. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with FEMA and the Maine State Planning Office Floodplain Management Program, began scoping work in 2005 for Somerset County. Scoping activities included assembling existing data and map needs information for communities in Somerset County (efforts were made to not duplicate those of pre-scoping completed in March 2005), documentation of data, contacts, community meetings, and prioritized mapping needs in a final scoping report (this document), and updating the Mapping Needs Update Support System (MNUSS) Database or its successor with information gathered during the scoping process. The average age of the FEMA floodplain maps in Somerset County, Maine is 18.1 years. Most of these studies were in the late 1970's to the mid 1980s. However, in the ensuing 20-30 years, development has occurred in many of the watersheds, and the characteristics of the watersheds have changed with time. Therefore, many of the older studies may not depict current conditions nor accurately estimate risk in terms of flood heights. The following is the scope of work as defined in the FEMA/USGS Statement of Work: Task 1: Collect data from a variety of sources including community surveys, other Federal and State Agencies, National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) State Coordinators, Community Assistance Visits (CAVs) and FEMA archives. Lists of mapping needs will be obtained from the MNUSS database, community surveys, and CAVs, if available. FEMA archives will be inventoried for effective FIRM panels, FIS reports, and other flood-hazard data or existing study data. Best available base map information, topographic data, flood-hazard data, and hydrologic and hydraulic data will be identified. Data from the Maine Floodplain Management Program database also will be utilized. Task 2: Contact communities in Somerset County to notify them that FEMA and the State have selected them for a map update, and that a project scope will be developed with their input. Topics to be reviewed with the communities include (1) Purpose of the Flood Map Project (for example, the update needs that have prompted the map update); (2) The community's mapping needs; (3) The community's available mapping, hydrologic, hydraulic, and flooding information; (4) target schedule for completing the project; and (5) The community's engineering, planning, and geographic information system (GIS) capabilities. On the basis of the collected information from Task 1 and community contacts/meetings in Task 2, the USGS will develop a Draft Project Scope for the identified mapping needs of the communities in Somerset County. The following items will be addressed in the Draft Project Scope: review of available information, determine if and ho

Open-File Report↗
USGS2007

Southwest Exotic Mapping Program 2007: Occurrence summary and maps of select invasive, non-native plants in Arizona

An important aspect of management of invasive, non-native plants (invasive plants) is information on the type, location, and magnitude of infestations. Regional development of this information requires an integrated program of data collection, management, and delivery. The Southwest Exotic Plant Mapping Program (SWEMP), coordinated through the U.S. Geological Survey’s Southwest Biological Science Center, annually compiles occurrence records for infestations of invasive plants. Operating since 1998, the SWEMP team has accepted occurrence records contributed voluntarily by federal, tribal, state, and private collaborators and has compiled these contributions accumulatively with previous versions of SWEMP. The SWEMP 2007 regional database update, SWEMP07, contains 62,000 records for 221 plant species with records dating as far back as 1911 and up to December, 2006. Records include invasive plants in Arizona, eastern California, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah. SWEMP07 is available through the Southwest Exotic Plant Information Clearinghouse ( http://sbsc.wr.usgs.gov/research/projects/swepic/swepic.asp , click SWEMP). Not all invasive plants are non-native and not all invasive plants are even invasive. The Arizona Invasive Species Advisory Council (2006) defined an invasive species as “a species that is (1) non-native to the ecosystem under consideration and, (2) whose introduction causes or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm, or harm to human health”. SWEMP uses the U.S. Department of Agriculture PLANTS database ( http://plants.usda.gov/ ) to determine if a plant is native or not to Arizona. As SWEMP does not independently assess the current or potential impact of invasive plants, we include most non-native plant records contributed. We have not included agricultural crops that are non-native, for example apples, oranges, etc. In this open-file-report, we use the SWEMP07 update to summarize the occurrence of invasive plants in Arizona and present distribution maps for a select invasive plants in Arizona. We use the word occurrence purposefully instead of the word distribution. The SWEMP07 database only provides an estimate of the actual distribution of invasive plants in Arizona. The information provided is a first approximation of the state-wide extent of invasive plant distribution.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2014

Land processes distributed active archive center product lifecycle plan

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Earth Science Data System Program worked together to establish, develop, and operate the Land Processes (LP) Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC) to provide stewardship for NASA’s land processes science data. These data are critical science assets that serve the land processes science community with potential value beyond any immediate research use, and therefore need to be accounted for and properly managed throughout their lifecycle. A fundamental LP DAAC objective is to enable permanent preservation of these data and information products. The LP DAAC accomplishes this by bridging data producers and permanent archival resources while providing intermediate archive services for data and information products.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2016

U.S. Department of the Interior Climate Science Centers and U.S. Geological Survey National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center—Annual report for 2015

2015 was another great year for the Department of the Interior (DOI) Climate Science Centers (CSCs) and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center (NCCWSC) network. The DOI CSCs and USGS NCCWSC continued their mission of providing the science, data, and tools that are needed for on-the-ground decision making by natural and cultural resource managers to address the effects of climate change on fish, wildlife, ecosystems, and communities. Our many accomplishments in 2015 included initiating a national effort to understand the influence of drought on wildlife and ecosystems; providing numerous opportunities for students and early career researchers to expand their networks and learn more about climate change effects; and working with tribes and indigenous communities to expand their knowledge of and preparation for the impacts of climate change on important resources and traditional ways of living. Here we illustrate some of these 2015 activities from across the CSCs and NCCWSC.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2014

Synthesis of studies in the fall low-salinity zone of the San Francisco Estuary, September-December 2011

In fall 2011, a large-scale investigation (fall low-salinity habitat investigation) was implemented by the Bureau of Reclamation in cooperation with the Interagency Ecological Program to explore hypotheses about the ecological role of low-salinity habitat in the San Francisco Estuary—specifically, hypotheses about the importance of fall low-salinity habitat to the biology of delta smelt Hypomesus transpacificus , a species endemic to the San Francisco Estuary and listed as threatened or endangered under federal and state endangered species legislation. The Interagency Ecological Program is a consortium of 10 agencies that work together to develop a better understanding of the ecology of the Estuary and the effects of the State Water Project and Federal Central Valley Project operations on the physical, chemical, and biological conditions of the San Francisco Estuary. The fall low-salinity habitat investigation constitutes one of the actions stipulated in the Reasonable and Prudent Alternative issued with the 2008 Biological Opinion of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which called for adaptive management of fall Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta outflow following “wet” and “above normal” water years to alleviate jeopardy to delta smelt and adverse modification of delta smelt critical habitat. The basic hypothesis of the adaptive management of fall low-salinity habitat is that greater outflows move the low-salinity zone (salinity 1–6), an important component of delta smelt habitat, westward and that moving the low-salinity zone westward of its position in the fall of recent years will benefit delta smelt, although the specific mechanisms providing such benefit are uncertain. An adaptive management plan was prepared to guide implementation of the adaptive management of fall low-salinity habitat and to reduce uncertainty. This report has three major objectives: • To provide a summary of the results from the first year of coordinated fall low-salinity habitat studies and monitoring. • To provide a synthesis of the results of the fall low-salinity habitat studies and other ongoing research and monitoring, to determine if the available information supports the hypotheses behind the adaptive management of fall low-salinity habitat as set forth in the adaptive management plan. • To begin to put the results from the fall low-salinity habitat studies into context within the larger body of knowledge regarding the San Francisco Estuary and, in particular, the upper San Francisco Estuary, including the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, Suisun Bay, and associated embayments. The basic approach of this report is to evaluate predictions derived from the hypotheses included in the conceptual model developed within the adaptive management plan. All available data from studies and monitoring conducted in fall 2011 and similar data from fall 2006, which was the most recent wet year preceding 2011, were considered. Data from 2005 and 2010 were also considered, to include the conditions antecedent to those years. Many of the predictions either could not be evaluated with the data available, or the needed data were not collected. Most of the predictions that could be addressed involved either the abiotic habitat components (that is, the physical environment) or delta smelt responses. In general, the fall low-salinity habitat investigation has been largely inconclusive as of the writing of this report. This is not to be unexpected in the first year of what is intended to be a multi-year adaptive-management effort. This report can be viewed as the first chapter of a “living document” that is to be continually updated as part of the adaptive management cycle. The results of this report, especially predictions with insufficient data for evaluation, indicate a number of science-based approaches to improve the fall low-salinity habitat investigations: • Develop a method of measuring “hydrodynamic complexity.” This concept is central to a number of the predictions that could not be evaluated. • Determine if wind speed warrants a stand-alone prediction. The wind-speed prediction is directly related to the turbidity predictions, and wind is only one of several factors important for determining turbidity. • Determine the correct spatial and temporal scale or scales necessary for monitoring and for studies to address the predicted abiotic and biotic responses. Many of the assessments in this report were based on monthly sampling of dynamic habitat components, such as phytoplankton and zooplankton populations, that can change on daily scales. • Address the nutrient predictions as part of developing a phytoplankton production model that includes nutrient cycling and other important processes, if feasible. At a minimum develop a mechanistic conceptual model to support more processed-based interpretations of data or design of new studies, rather than making simple predictions of increase or decrease. • Determine if studies of predation rates are feasible in areas where there are delta smelt.

California↗