Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “National Wildlife”

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 1,369 records · Page 76Linked to original sources
USGS2009

Geography of Alaska lake districts: Identification, description, and analysis of lake-rich regions of a diverse and dynamic state

Lakes are abundant landforms and important ecosystems in Alaska, but are unevenly distributed on the landscape with expansive lake-poor regions and several lake-rich regions. Such lake-rich areas are termed lake districts and have landscape characteristics that can be considered distinctive in similar respects to mountain ranges. In this report, we explore the nature of lake-rich areas by quantitatively identifying Alaska’s lake districts, describing and comparing their physical characteristics, and analyzing how Alaska lake districts are naturally organized and correspond to climatic and geophysical characteristics, as well as studied and managed by people. We use a digital dataset (National Hydrography Dataset) of lakes greater than 1 hectare, which includes 409,040 individual lakes and represents 3.3 percent of the land-surface area of Alaska. The selection criteria we used to identify lake districts were (1) a lake area (termed limnetic ratio, in percent) greater than the mean for the State, and (2) a lake density (number of lakes per unit area) greater than the mean for the State using a pixel size scaled to the area of interest and number of lakes in the census. Pixels meeting these criteria were grouped and delineated and all groups greater than 1,000 square kilometers were identified as Alaska’s lake districts. These lake districts were described according to lake size-frequency metrics, elevation distributions, geology, climate, and ecoregions to better understand their similarities and differences. We also looked at where lake research and relevant ecological monitoring has occurred in Alaska relative to lake districts and how lake district lands and waters are currently managed. We identified and delineated 20 lake districts in Alaska representing 16 percent of the State, but including 65 percent of lakes and 75 percent of lake area. The largest lake districts identified are the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, Arctic Coastal Plain, and Iliamna lake districts with high limnetic ratios of 19, 17, and 21 percent, respectively. The three smallest districts we considered were Tetlin in the eastern interior, Menhiskof on the Alaska Peninsula, and Matanuska–Susitna at the head of Cook Inlet with limnetic ratios of 14, 9, and 9 percent, respectively. Lake density and limnetic ratio were poorly related among lake districts, such that some districts had a few large lakes like Iliamna with Lakes Iliamna and Becharof—the two largest in the State, compared to other districts with many very small lakes like Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta with 111,130 lakes and 63 percent of these less than 10 hectares. Most lake districts are in regions with relatively low precipitation, but temperature regimes varied widely among lake districts. Approximately one-half of lake districts were glaciated during the Pleistocene and similar numbers occur in regions classified as having continuous, discontinuous, and sporadic permafrost, or perennially unfrozen soils. Most districts are at low elevations (less than 250 meters) with two important exceptions being Tetlin with a mean elevation of 530 meters and Ahtna with a mean elevation of 760 meters. These higher elevation districts, particularly Ahtna, had distinct characteristics from other lake districts such as continuous permafrost and Pleistocene glaciation. Several lake districts share similar boundaries to defined ecoregions with lake districts occurring in less than one-half of these 32 ecoregions of Alaska. Most lake districts are lands fully or partly managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Park Service, with other land management by the Bureau of Land Management and State and borough government. Much of the U.S. Geological Survey’s lake water-quality sampling efforts has been done in the Arctic Coastal Plain, Matanuska-Susitna, and Iliamna districts but no recorded collections in nine lake districts. Similarly, most lake limnological studies in Alaska were site-specific and represent only a small portion of Alaska’s lake districts. This identification, characterization, and analysis of lake-rich regions may help provide a template to guide future limnological and other scientific research for Alaska.

Alaska↗
USGS2026

Bright spot in eDNA monitoring: Early detection of invasive New Zealand mudsnails (Potamopyrgus antipodarum) prompted effective rapid response for fish hatchery

The New Zealand mudsnail (NZMS; Potamopyrgus antipodarum ) is a widespread aquatic invasive species that is parthenogenic, requiring only a single individual to initiate an infestation. Fish hatcheries–which are critical infrastructure that raise fish to support conservation, recreation, and subsistence fisheries–frequently use local water sources to provide cool water and are especially vulnerable to NZMS invasion from the contamination of water supplies. If an invasion proceeds undetected, hatcheries pose a risk for compounding the spread of NZMS because their operations transfer live organisms and associated water between hatchery facilities and, when stocking, to rivers and lakes. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Alchesay National Fish Hatchery, located on the Fort Apache Indian Reservation in Whiteriver, Arizona, produces trout to stock in Tribal reservoirs, lakes, and rivers across the southwestern U.S. New Zealand mudsnails were first documented in Arizona in 1995, are now widespread in this region, and occur at the confluence of the hatchery's outflow with the North Fork White River. Contamination of water supplies is the principal pathway for NZMS invasion into the hatchery. Here, we describe early detection environmental DNA (eDNA) surveillance efforts for NZMS at Alchesay National Fish Hatchery. Positive eDNA detections initiated a chain of events that ultimately led to four NZMS individuals being discovered and a rapid response eradication effort. Follow-up eDNA sampling and visual observation efforts after the eradication effort have yielded no detections of NZMS eDNA. We credit the success of this case with four key elements: rapid turnaround times, a robust quality assurance scheme, a proactive eDNA sampling design, and established partnerships. To our knowledge, this is the first published case of eDNA monitoring being used for early detection and successful rapid response for complete removal of an invasive species in a fish hatchery.

Arizona↗
USGS2023

Pardus in the press: Drivers of leopard (Panthera pardus fusca) attack occurrence on humans in Nepal

The negative impact of large carnivore presence in human-dominated landscapes manifests as livestock depredation and in extreme cases as attacks on humans. In the case of conflict with leopards in Nepal, attacks resulting in human fatality have become more frequent over time, thus creating an urgent socio-ecological and management issue. We estimated the occurrence of leopard attacks in Nepal from human-leopard conflict cases reported in the media. We used occupancy models to analyse data collected from online news reports on incidents of leopard attacks on humans to explore drivers of leopard attacks on a landscape scale. Our results suggest that the probability of occurrence of leopard attack is associated with human population density, terrain ruggedness and livestock density. The human population density effect may be indicative of a density-dependent relationship, where attacks are more likely in areas where an increased abundance of humans increases encounter rates with leopards. The positive effect of livestock density suggests that livestock may be drawing leopards into human settlements, and consequently increasing the likelihood of attacks on humans. Terrain ruggedness might be offering ideal conditions to facilitate attacks on humans, for example remoteness and high amounts of cover to launch ambush attacks. We provide inference and insights into key determinants of leopard attacks on humans on a landscape scale. These insights can be used to guide future research, inform mitigation measures to reduce leopard attacks and foster a better understanding of the interaction between people and leopards. This study demonstrates the applicability and novelty of using a hierarchical modelling framework applied to freely and publicly available media reports to inform the applied management of human-wildlife conflict at a national scale.

People and Nature↗
USGS2024

Using climate-fire analog mapping to inform climate change adaptation strategies for wildland fire in protected areas of the conterminous US

Potential changes in wildland fire regimes due to anthropogenic climate change can be projected using data from climate models, but directly applying these meteorological variables to long-term planning and adaptive management activities may be difficult for decision makers. Analog mapping, in contrast, creates more intuitive assessments of changing fire regimes that also recognize the complex, multivariate, and multi-scalar nature of ecosystems. Here, we use data from 20 downscaled climate models under two climate forcing scenarios, Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP 4.5 and 8.5), to identify and map future climate-fire analogs for 655 protected areas in the conterminous U.S. based on annual temperature, cumulative precipitation amount and seasonality, and fire regime potentials derived from a simple process-based fire frequency model. Patterns of analogs were heavily influenced by gradients in latitude and topography, with longer time frames (end-of-century conditions) and the more extreme climate forcing scenario resulting in greater analog distances and more ensemble entropy (i.e., less consensus among climate models regarding the closest analog for a given management unit). Finer scale analyses for three protected areas (Yellowstone and Great Smoky Mountains National Parks, White Mountain National Forest) illustrate how climate-fire analog mapping can improve insight into the types of ecosystem responses that might occur under similar management conditions. Federally protected areas such as national parks, forests, and wildlife refuges have long served as reference sites for the study of fire regimes, a role that is likely to continue because many of these units are managed to allow at least some ecosystem processes to operate independently. The results suggest that analog mapping approaches are well-suited as part of qualitative assessments within climate- and fire-aware adaptive management processes. The use of analogs to depict relatable, real-world depictions of possible ecosystem changes in a given place, can help managers make more strategic choices about when and where to resist, accept, or direct climate change-driven ecological change.

Global Environmental Change Advances↗
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↗
USGS2006

Taxonomic considerations in listing subspecies under the U.S. Endangered Species Act

The U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) allows listing of subspecies and other groupings below the rank of species. This provides the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service with a means to target the most critical unit in need of conservation. Although roughly one-quarter of listed taxa are subspecies, these management agencies are hindered by uncertainties about taxonomic standards during listing or delisting activities. In a review of taxonomic publications and societies, we found few subspecies lists and none that stated standardized criteria for determining subspecific taxa. Lack of criteria is attributed to a centuries-old debate over species and subspecies concepts. Nevertheless, the critical need to resolve this debate for ESA listings led us to propose that minimal biological criteria to define disjunct subspecies (legally or taxonomically) should include the discreteness and significance criteria of distinct population segments (as defined under the ESA). Our subspecies criteria are in stark contrast to that proposed by supporters of the phylogenetic species concept and provide a clear distinction between species and subspecies. Efforts to eliminate or reduce ambiguity associated with subspecies-level classifications will assist with ESA listing decisions. Thus, we urge professional taxonomic societies to publish and periodically update peer-reviewed species and subspecies lists. This effort must be paralleled throughout the world for efficient taxonomic conservation to take place.

Conservation Biology↗
USGS2008

Impacts of Low-Flow and Stream-Temperature Changes on Endangered Atlantic Salmon - Current Research

Recent climate studies in New England and the northeastern United States have shown evidence of physical changes over time, including trends toward earlier snowmelt runoff, decreasing river ice, and increasing spring water temperatures. A U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) study funded by the National Global Warming and Wildlife Science Center will be investigating changes in summer low streamflows and stream temperatures and the potential effects of those changes on endangered Atlantic salmon populations. The study also will evaluate management options that would be most likely to mitigate the effects of any changes in streamflow and temperature.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2010

Regional climate change-Science in the Southeast

Resource managers are at the forefront of a new era of management. They must consider the potential impacts of climate change on the Nation's resources and proactively develop strategies for dealing with those impacts on plants, animals, and ecosystems. This requires rigorous, scientific understanding of environmental change. The role of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in this effort is to analyze climate-change data and develop tools for assessing how changing conditions are likely to impact resources. This information will assist Federal, State, local, and tribal partners manage resources strategically. The 2008 Omnibus Budget Act and Secretarial Order 3289 established a new network of eight Department of Interior Regional Climate Science Centers to provide technical support for resource managers. The Southeast Regional Assessment Project (SERAP) is the first regional assessment to be funded by the USGS National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center (http://nccw.usgs.gov/). The USGS is working closely with the developing Department of Interior Landscape Conservation Cooperatives to ensure that the project will meet the needs of resource managers in the Southeast. In addition, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is providing resources to the SERAP to expand the scope of the project.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2012

DOI Climate Science Centers--Regional science to address management priorities

Our Nation's lands, waters, and ecosystems and the living and cultural resources they contain face myriad challenges from invasive species, the effects of changing land and water use, habitat fragmentation and degradation, and other influences. These challenges are compounded by increasing influences from a changing climate—higher temperatures, increasing droughts, floods, and wildfires, and overall increasing variability in weather and climate. The Department of the Interior (DOI) has established eight regional Climate Science Centers (CSC) (fig. 1) that will provide scientific information and tools to natural and cultural resource managers as they plan for conserving these resources in a changing world. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center (NCCWSC) is managing the CSCs on behalf of the DOI.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2013

The 3D Elevation Program: summary for Wisconsin

Elevation data are essential to a broad range of applications, including forest resources management, wildlife and habitat management, national security, recreation, and many others. For the State of Wisconsin, elevation data are critical for agriculture and precision farming, natural resources conservation, flood risk management, infrastructure and construction management, water supply and quality, and other business uses. Today, high-quality light detection and ranging (lidar) data are the sources for creating elevation models and other elevation datasets. Federal, State, and local agencies work in partnership to (1) replace data, on a national basis, that are (on average) 30 years old and of lower quality and (2) provide coverage where publicly accessible data do not exist. A joint goal of State and Federal partners is to acquire consistent, statewide coverage to support existing and emerging applications enabled by lidar data. The new 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) initiative, managed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), responds to the growing need for high-quality topographic data and a wide range of other three-dimensional representations of the Nation’s natural and constructed features.

Wisconsin↗
USGS2013

The 3D Elevation Program: summary for Rhode Island

Elevation data are essential to a broad range of applications, including forest resources management, wildlife and habitat management, national security, recreation, and many others. For the State of Rhode Island, elevation data are critical for flood risk management, natural resources conservation, coastal zone management, sea level rise and subsidence, agriculture and precision farming, and other business uses. Today, high-quality light detection and ranging (lidar) data are the sources for creating elevation models and other elevation datasets. Federal, State, and local agencies work in partnership to (1) replace data, on a national basis, that are (on average) 30 years old and of lower quality and (2) provide coverage where publicly accessible data do not exist. A joint goal of State and Federal partners is to acquire consistent, statewide coverage to support existing and emerging applications enabled by lidar data. The new 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) initiative (Snyder, 2012a,b), managed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), responds to the growing need for high-quality topographic data and a wide range of other three-dimensional representations of the Nation’s natural and constructed features.

Rhode Island↗
USGS2013

The 3D Elevation Program: summary for Colorado

Elevation data are essential to a broad range of applications, including forest resources management, wildlife and habitat management, national security, recreation, and many others. For the State of Colorado, elevation data are critical for natural resources conservation, agriculture and precision farming, infrastructure and construction management, flood risk management, geologic resource assessment and hazards mitigation, and other business uses. Today, high-density light detection and ranging (lidar) data are the primary sources for deriving elevation models and other datasets. Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies work in partnership to (1) replace data that are older and of lower quality and (2) provide coverage where publicly accessible data do not exist. A joint goal of State and Federal partners is to acquire consistent, statewide coverage to support existing and emerging applications enabled by lidar data. The National Enhanced Elevation Assessment evaluated multiple elevation data acquisition options to determine the optimal data quality and data replacement cycle relative to cost to meet the identified requirements of the user community. The evaluation demonstrated that lidar acquisition at quality level 2 for the conterminous United States and quality level 5 interferometric synthetic aperture radar (ifsar) data for Alaska with a 6- to 10-year acquisition cycle provided the highest benefit/cost ratios. The 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) initiative selected an 8-year acquisition cycle for the respective quality levels. 3DEP, managed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Office of Management and Budget Circular A–16 lead agency for terrestrial elevation data, responds to the growing need for high-quality topographic data and a wide range of other 3D representations of the Nation’s natural and constructed features.

Colorado↗
USGS2013

The 3D Elevation Program: summary for Minnesota

Elevation data are essential to a broad range of applications, including forest resources management, wildlife and habitat management, national security, recreation, and many others. For the State of Minnesota, elevation data are critical for agriculture and precision farming, natural resources conservation, flood risk management, infrastructure and construction management, water supply and quality, coastal zone management, and other business uses. Today, high-quality light detection and ranging (lidar) data are the sources for creating elevation models and other elevation datasets. Federal, State, and local agencies work in partnership to (1) replace data, on a national basis, that are (on average) 30 years old and of lower quality and (2) provide coverage where publicly accessible data do not exist. A joint goal of State and Federal partners is to acquire consistent, statewide coverage to support existing and emerging applications enabled by lidar data. The new 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) initiative, managed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), responds to the growing need for high-quality topographic data and a wide range of other three-dimensional representations of the Nation’s natural and constructed features.

Minnesota↗
USGS2013

The 3D Elevation Program: summary for Virginia

Elevation data are essential to a broad range of applications, including forest resources management, wildlife and habitat management, national security, recreation, and many others. For the Commonwealth of Virginia, elevation data are critical for urban and regional planning, natural resources conservation, flood risk management, agriculture and precision farming, resource mining, infrastructure and construction management, and other business uses. Today, high-quality light detection and ranging (lidar) data are the sources for creating elevation models and other elevation datasets. Federal, State, and local agencies work in partnership to (1) replace data, on a national basis, that are (on average) 30 years old and of lower quality and (2) provide coverage where publicly accessible data do not exist. A joint goal of State and Federal partners is to acquire consistent, statewide coverage to support existing and emerging applications enabled by lidar data. The new 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) initiative, managed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), responds to the growing need for high-quality topographic data and a wide range of other three-dimensional representations of the Nation’s natural and constructed features.

Virginia↗
USGS2013

The 3D Elevation Program: summary for Idaho

Elevation data are essential to a broad range of applications, including forest resources management, wildlife and habitat management, national security, recreation, and many others. For the State of Idaho, elevation data are critical for agriculture and precision farming, natural resources conservation, infrastructure and construction management, geologic resource assessment and hazard mitigation, flood risk management, forest resources management, and other business uses. Today, high-quality light detection and ranging (lidar) data are the sources for creating elevation models and other elevation datasets. Federal, State, and local agencies work in partnership to (1) replace data, on a national basis, that are (on average) 30 years old and of lower quality and (2) provide coverage where publicly accessible data do not exist. A joint goal of State and Federal partners is to acquire consistent, statewide coverage to support existing and emerging applications enabled by lidar data. The new 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) initiative, managed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), responds to the growing need for high-quality topographic data and a wide range of other three-dimensional representations of the Nation’s natural and constructed features. The Idaho LiDAR Consortium provides statewide collaboration and data sharing mechanisms that can be used as a resource by State and Federal partners implementing the 3DEP initiative.

Idaho↗
USGS2013

The 3D Elevation Program: summary for California

Elevation data are essential to a broad range of applications, including forest resources management, wildlife and habitat management, national security, recreation, and many others. For the State of California, elevation data are critical for infrastructure and construction management; natural resources conservation; flood risk management; wildfire management, planning, and response; agriculture and precision farming; geologic resource assessment and hazard mitigation; and other business uses. Today, high-quality light detection and ranging (lidar) data are the sources for creating elevation models and other elevation datasets. Federal, State, and local agencies work in partnership to (1) replace data, on a national basis, that are (on average) 30 years old and of lower quality and (2) provide coverage where publicly accessible data do not exist. A joint goal of State and Federal partners is to acquire consistent, statewide coverage to support existing and emerging applications enabled by lidar data. The new 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) initiative, managed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), responds to the growing need for high-quality topographic data and a wide range of other three-dimensional representations of the Nation’s natural and constructed features.

California↗
USGS2013

The 3D Elevation Program: summary for Washington

Elevation data are essential to a broad range of applications, including forest resources management, wildlife and habitat management, national security, recreation, and many others. For the State of Washington, elevation data are critical for natural resources conservation, agriculture and precision farming, infrastructure and construction management, flood risk management, geologic resource assessment and hazards mitigation, and other business uses. Today, high-density light detection and ranging (lidar) data are the primary sources for deriving elevation models and other datasets. Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies work in partnership to (1) replace data that are older and of lower quality and (2) provide coverage where publicly accessible data do not exist. A joint goal of State and Federal partners is to acquire consistent, statewide coverage to support existing and emerging applications enabled by lidar data. The National Enhanced Elevation Assessment evaluated multiple elevation data acquisition options to determine the optimal data quality and data replacement cycle relative to cost to meet the identified requirements of the user community. The evaluation demonstrated that lidar acquisition at quality level 2 for the conterminous United States and quality level 5 interferometric synthetic aperture radar (ifsar) data for Alaska with a 6- to 10-year acquisition cycle provided the highest benefit/cost ratios. The 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) initiative selected an 8-year acquisition cycle for the respective quality levels. 3DEP, managed by the U.S. Geological Survey, the Office of Management and Budget Circular A–16 lead agency for terrestrial elevation data, responds to the growing need for high-quality topographic data and a wide range of other 3D representations of the Nation’s natural and constructed features.

Washington↗
USGS2013

The 3D Elevation Program: summary for Florida

Elevation data are essential to a broad range of applications, including forest resources management, wildlife and habitat management, national security, recreation, and many others. For the State of Florida, elevation data are critical for natural resources conservation; flood risk management; infrastructure and construction management; coastal zone management; sea level rise and subsidence; wildfire management, planning, and response; and other business uses. Today, high-density light detection and ranging (lidar) data are the primary sources for deriving elevation models and other datasets. Federal, State, and local agencies work in partnership to (1) replace data that are older and of lower quality and (2) provide coverage where publicly accessible data do not exist. A joint goal of State and Federal partners is to acquire consistent, statewide coverage to support existing and emerging applications enabled by lidar data. The National Enhanced Elevation Assessment evaluated multiple elevation data acquisition options to determine the optimal data quality and data replacement cycle relative to cost to meet the identified requirements of the user community. The evaluation demonstrated that lidar acquisition at quality level 2 for the conterminous United States and quality level 5 ifsar data for Alaska with a 6- to 10-year acquisition cycle provided the highest benefit/cost ratios.The new 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) initiative selected an 8-year acquisition cycle for the respective quality levels. 3DEP, managed by the U.S. Geological Survey, the OMB Circular A–16 lead agency for terrestrial elevation data, responds to the growing need for high-quality topographic data and a wide range of other 3D representations of the Nation’s natural and constructed features.

Florida↗