Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Coastal Engineering”

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 145 records · Page 8Linked to original sources

Archive of side scan sonar and swath bathymetry data collected during USGS cruise 10CCT01 offshore of Cat Island, Gulf Islands National Seashore, Mississippi, March 2010

In March of 2010, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducted geophysical surveys east of Cat Island, Mississippi (fig. 1). The efforts were part of the USGS Gulf of Mexico Science Coordination partnership with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to assist the Mississippi Coastal Improvements Program (MsCIP) and the Northern Gulf of Mexico (NGOM) Ecosystem Change and Hazards Susceptibility Project by mapping the shallow geological stratigraphic framework of the Mississippi Barrier Island Complex. These geophysical surveys will provide the data necessary for scientists to define, interpret, and provide baseline bathymetry and seafloor habitat for this area and to aid scientists in predicting future geomorpholocial changes of the islands with respect to climate change, storm impact, and sea-level rise. Furthermore, these data will provide information for barrier island restoration, particularly in Camille Cut, and provide protection for the historical Fort Massachusetts. For more information refer to http://ngom.usgs.gov/gomsc/mscip/index.html. This report serves as an archive of the processed swath bathymetry and side scan sonar data (SSS). Data products herein include gridded and interpolated surfaces, surface images, and x,y,z data products for both swath bathymetry and side scan sonar imagery. Additional files include trackline maps, navigation files, GIS files, Field Activity Collection System (FACS) logs, and formal FGDC metadata. Scanned images of the handwritten FACS logs and digital FACS logs are also provided as PDF files. Refer to the Acronyms page for expansion of acronyms and abbreviations used in this report or hold the cursor over an acronym for a pop-up explanation. The USGS St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center assigns a unique identifier to each cruise or field activity. For example, 10CCT01 tells us the data were collected in 2010 for the Coastal Change and Transport (CCT) study and the data were collected during the first field activity for that project in that calendar year. Refer to http://walrus.wr.usgs.gov/infobank/programs/html/definition/activity.html for a detailed description of the method used to assign the field activity ID. Data were collected using a 26-foot (ft) Glacier Bay Catamaran. Side scan sonar and interferometric swath bathymetry data were collected simultaneously along the tracklines. The side scan sonar towfish was towed off the port side just slightly behind the vessel, close to the seafloor. The interferometric swath transducer was sled-mounted on a rail attached between the catamaran hulls. During the survey the sled is secured into position. Navigation was acquired with a CodaOctopus Octopus F190 Precision Attitude and Positioning System and differentially corrected with OmniSTAR. See the digital FACS equipment log for details about the acquisition equipment used. Both raw datasets were stored digitally and processed using CARIS HIPS and SIPS software at the USGS St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center. For more information on processing refer to the Equipment and Processing page. Post-processing of the swath dataset revealed a motion artifact that is attributed to movement of the pole that the swath transducers are attached to in relation to the boat. The survey took place in the winter months, in which strong winds and rough waves contributed to a reduction in data quality. The rough seas contributed to both the movement of the pole and the very high noise base seen in the raw amplitude data of the side scan sonar. Chirp data were also collected during this survey and are archived separately.

Mississippi↗

Archive of Side Scan Sonar and Swath Bathymetry Data collected during USGS Cruise 10CCT02 Offshore of Petit Bois Island Including Petit Bois Pass, Gulf Islands National Seashore, Mississippi, March 2010

In March of 2010, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducted geophysical surveys offshore of Petit Bois Island, Mississippi, and Dauphin Island, Alabama (fig. 1). These efforts were part of the USGS Gulf of Mexico Science Coordination partnership with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to assist the Mississippi Coastal Improvements Program (MsCIP) and the Northern Gulf of Mexico (NGOM) Ecosystem Change and Hazards Susceptibility Project by mapping the shallow geologic stratigraphic framework of the Mississippi Barrier Island Complex. These geophysical surveys will provide the data necessary for scientists to define, interpret, and provide baseline bathymetry and seafloor habitat for this area and to aid scientists in predicting future geomorphological changes of the islands with respect to climate change, storm impact, and sea-level rise. Furthermore, these data will provide information for barrier island restoration, particularly in Camille Cut, and protection for the historical Fort Massachusetts on Ship Island, Mississippi. For more information please refer to http://ngom.usgs.gov/gomsc/mscip/index.html. This report serves as an archive of the processed swath bathymetry and side scan sonar data (SSS). Data products herein include gridded and interpolated surfaces, seabed backscatter images, and ASCII x,y,z data products for both swath bathymetry and side scan sonar imagery. Additional files include trackline maps, navigation files, GIS files, Field Activity Collection System (FACS) logs, and formal FGDC metadata. Scanned images of the handwritten and digital FACS logs are also provided as PDF files. Refer to the Acronyms page for expansion of acronyms and abbreviations used in this report.

Data Series↗

Reconnaissance engineering geology of the Metlakatla area, Annette Island, Alaska, with emphasis on evaluation of earthquakes and other geologic hazards

A program to study the engineering geology of most larger Alaska coastal communities and to evaluate their earthquake and other geologic hazards was started following the 1964 Alaska earthquake; this report about the Metlakatla area, Annette Island, is a product of that program. Field-study methods were of a reconnaissance nature, and thus the interpretations in the report are tentative. Landscape of the Metlakatla Peninsula, on which the city of Metlakatla is located, is characterized by a muskeg-covered terrane of very low relief. In contrast, most of the rest of Annette Island is composed of mountainous terrane with steep valleys and numerous lakes. During the Pleistocene Epoch the Metlakatla area was presumably covered by ice several times; glaciers smoothed the present Metlakatla Peninsula and deeply eroded valleys on the rest. of Annette Island. The last major deglaciation was completed probably before 10,000 years ago. Rebound of the earth's crust, believed to be related to glacial melting, has caused land emergence at Metlakatla of at least 50 ft (15 m) and probably more than 200 ft (61 m) relative to present sea level. Bedrock in the Metlakatla area is composed chiefly of hard metamorphic rocks: greenschist and greenstone with minor hornfels and schist. Strike and dip of beds are generally variable and minor offsets are common. Bedrock is of late Paleozoic to early Mesozoic age. Six types of surficial geologic materials of Quaternary age were recognized: firm diamicton, emerged shore, modern shore and delta, and alluvial deposits, very soft muskeg and other organic deposits, and firm to soft artificial fill. A combination map unit is composed of bedrock or diamicton. Geologic structure in southeastern Alaska is complex because, since at least early Paleozoic time, there have been several cycles of tectonic deformation that affected different parts of the region. Southeastern Alaska is transected by numerous faults and possible faults that attest to major movements of the earth's crust. The latest of the major tectonic events in the Metlakatla region occurred in middle Tertiary time; some minor fault activity probably continues today at depth. Along the outer coast of southeastern Alaska and British Columbia, major faulting activity occurs in the form of active, strike-slip movement along the Queen Charlotte fault about 100 mi (160 kin) west-southwest of Metlakatla. Some branching subsidiary faults also may be active, at least one of which may be the Sandspit fault. Many major and smaller earthquakes occur along the outer coast. These shocks are related to movements along the Queen Charlotte fault. A few small earthquakes occur in the region between the outer coast and the Coast Mountains, which includes Metlakatla. 0nly a few earthquakes have been reported as felt at Metlakatla; these shocks and others felt in the region are tabulated. Historically, the closest major earthquake was the magnitude 8.1 Queen Charlotte Islands earthquake of August 22, 1949, which occurred along the Queen Charlotte fault 125 mi (200 km) southwest of Metlakatla. No damage was reported at Metlakatla. The probability of destructive earthquakes affecting Metlakatla is unknown. A consideration of the tectonics and earthquake history of the region, however, suggests that sometime in the future an earthquake with a magnitude of about 8 will occur along that segment of the Queen Charlotte fault nearest to Metlakatla. Smaller earthquakes with magnitudes of 6 or more might occur elsewhere in the Metlakatla region or south-southeastward near Dixon Entrance or Hecate Strait. Several geologic effects that have characterized large earthquakes elsewh6re may be expected to accompany some of the possible major earthquakes that might affect the Metlakatla area in the future. Evaluation of effects indicates that fault displacement and tectonic uplift or subsidence are probably unlikely, and ground shaking in general probably would be strongest

Open-File Report↗

Reconnaissance engineering geology of the Petersburg area, southeastern Alaska, with emphasis on geologic hazards

A program to study the engineering geology of most larger Alaska coastal communities and to evaluate their earthquake and other geologic hazards was started following the 1964 Alaska earthquake; this report about the Petersburg area is a product of that program. Field-study methods were of a reconnaissance nature, and thus, interpretations in the report are tentative. Landscape of the northern end of Mitkof Island on which Petersburg is situated is characterized by a gently sloping, muskeg-covered terrain, with altitudes mostly less than 30 m. In contrast, much of the rest of the island is composed of mountainous terrain with many steep valleys. During the Pleistocene Epoch, the Petersburg area presumably was covered by ice several times; glaciers deeply eroded many valleys on Mitkof Island and adjacent areas. The last major deglaciation probably was largely completed by 12,000 years ago. Delayed rebound of the earth's crust, after the melting of large amounts of ice, permitted extensive inundation of land in the Petersburg area. Subsequently, emergence has elevated marine deposits to a present-day altitude of at least 65 m and probably to 75 m. Bedrock in the Petersburg map area is composed of relatively hard metamorphic rocks, chiefly phyllite and probably some graywacke. Rocks are of Middle(?) Jurassic to Early Cretaceous age. Five types of surficial geologic material of Quaternary age were recognized: (1) mixed deposits consisting of diamicton, silt-clay, and sand or sandy pebble gravel, (2) alluvial deposits, (3) shore and delta deposits, (4) organic deposits, and (5) artificial fill. Geologic structure in southeastern Alaska is complex because several cycles of tectonic deformation since at least early Paelozoic time have affected different parts of the region. The latest of the major tectonic events in southeastern Alaska occurred in Tertiary time, with some minor activity continuing into the Quaternary Period. Along the outer coast of southeastern Alaska, active strike-slip movement is occurring along the Chichagof-Baranof and Queen Charlotte faults. A segment of the prominent Coast-Range lineament, part of which may be a fault, lies 18 km northeast of Petersburg. Many earthquakes occur along the outer coast of southeastern Alaska. Most of these shocks are associated with movements along the Chichagof-Baranof, Queen Charlotte, and Transition faults. A few small earthquakes occur in the region between the outer coast and the southern part of the Coast Mountains. 0nly a few earthquakes have been recorded as felt at Petersburg; these shocks and others possibly felt in the Petersburg region are tabulated. Among the recorded earthquakes the highest intensity (about V-VI) as the magnitude 7.1 earthquake of October 24, 1927, that occurred probably along the Chichagof-Baranof fault, and about 225 km northwest of Petersburg; damage was reported as minor. Other large earthquakes along the Chichagof-Baranof fault that affected or probably affected the Petersburg area in a minor way occurred on August 22, 1949 (magnitude 8.1) and on July 30, 1972 (magnitude 7.25). From a consideration of the tectonics and earthquake history of the region, earthquakes similar to the 1927, 1949, and 1972 shocks are expected to recur on segments of the Chichagof-Baranof or Queen Charlotte faults. The closest of these fault segments is about 170 km southwest from Petersburg. The likelihood of destructive earthquakes being generated along faults closer to Petersburg is unknown. A very generalized discussion of possible geologic effects that could occur in the area during a postulated, theoretically reasonable worst case earthquake of magnitude 8 occurring along the outer coast about 170 km southwest from Petersburg notes that ground shaking probably would be strongest on organic deposits and least on bedrock and on firm, compact diamicton. Among other effects that could happen are: (1) liquefaction of some of the few delta and alluvial

Open-File Report↗

Effects of oyster harvest activities on Louisiana reef habitat and resident nekton communities

Oysters are often cited as “ecosystem engineers” because they modify their environment. Coastal Louisiana contains extensive oyster reef areas that have been harvested for decades, and whether differences in habitat functions exist between those areas and nonharvested reefs is unclear. We compared reef physical structure and resident community metrics between these 2 subtidal reef types. Harvested reefs were more fragmented and had lower densities of live eastern oysters ( Crassostrea virginica ) and hooked mussels ( Ischadium recurvum ) than the nonharvested reefs. Stable isotope values ( 13 C and 15 N) of dominant nekton species and basal food sources were used to compare food web characteristics. Nonpelagic source contributions and trophic positions of dominant species were slightly elevated at harvested sites. Oyster harvesting appeared to have decreased the number of large oysters and to have increased the percentage of reefs that were nonliving by decreasing water column filtration and benthopelagic coupling. The differences in reef matrix composition, however, had little effect on resident nekton communities. Understanding the thresholds of reef habitat areas, the oyster density or oyster size distribution below which ecosystem services may be compromised, remains key to sustainable management.

Louisiana↗

Rigorously valuing the impact of Hurricanes Irma and Maria on coastal hazard risks in Florida and Puerto Rico

The degradation of coastal habitats, particularly coral reefs, raises risks by increasing the exposure of coastal communities to flooding hazards. In the United States, the physical protective services provided by coral reefs were recently assessed in social and economic terms, with the annual protection provided by U.S. coral reefs off the coasts of the State of Florida and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico estimated to be more than 9,800 people and $859 million (2010 U.S. dollars). Hurricanes Irma and Maria in 2017 caused widespread damage to coral reefs in the State of Florida and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. These damages were measured in post-storm surveys of reefs and assessed in terms of their impact on reef condition and height, which are critical parameters for evaluating the coastal defense benefits of reefs. We combined engineering, ecologic, geospatial, social, and economic data and tools to value the increased risks in Florida and Puerto Rico from hurricane-induced damages to their adjacent coral reefs. We followed risk-based valuation approaches to map flooding at 10-square-meter resolution along all 980 kilometers of Florida and Puerto Rico’s reef-lined shorelines considering reef condition before (undamaged) and after (damaged) the 2017 hurricanes. We quantified the coastal flood risk increase caused by the hurricane-induced damage to the coral reefs using the latest information from the U.S. Census Bureau, Federal Emergency Management Agency, and Bureau of Economic Analysis for return-interval storm events. Using the damages associated with each storm probability, we also calculated the change in annual expected damages, a measure of the annual protection lost because of the reef damage caused by the 2017 hurricanes. We found that the damages to the coral reefs off Florida and Puerto Rico from Hurricanes Irma and Maria increased future risks significantly. In particular, we estimated the protection lost by Florida and Puerto Rico’s coral reefs from the 2017 hurricanes to result in: Increased flooding to more than 10.72 square kilometers (4.14 square miles) of land annually; Increased flooding affecting more than 4,300 people annually; Increased direct damages of more than $57.2 million to more than 1,800 buildings annually; and Increased indirect damages to more $124.3 million in economic activity owing to housing and business damage annually. Thus, the annual value of increased flood risk caused by the damage to Florida and Puerto Rico’s coral reefs from hurricanes in 2017 is more than 4,300 people and $181.5 mil-lion (2010 U.S. dollars) in economic impacts. These data provide stakeholders and decision makers with a spatially explicit, rigorous valuation of how, where, and when the damage from the 2017 hurricanes decreased critical coastal storm flood reduction benefits to Florida and Puerto Rico’s coral reefs. These results help identify areas where reef management, recovery, and restoration could potentially help reduce the risk to, and increase the resiliency of, Florida and Puerto Rico’s coastal communities.

Florida↗

The 3D Elevation Program—Supporting Ohio's economy

Introduction High-quality elevation data are proving to be a resource of great economic value in dealing with many important issues in Ohio. Current and accurate high-resolution elevation data support flood risk management, water quantity and quality assessment, precision farming, conservation planning, impervious-surface modeling, forest and other natural resources management, abandoned mine and geologic hazard assessment, karst mapping, and siting of wellhead pads for horizontal drilling. These data also support coastal zone management, traffic safety and preliminary engineering site-selection studies for transportation infrastructure, solar potential and other renewable energy planning, aviation safety, and identification of features of interest or concern such as archaeological sites and orphan oil and gas wells. Critical applications that meet the State’s management needs depend on light detection and ranging (lidar) data that provide a highly detailed three-dimensional (3D) model of the Earth’s surface and aboveground features.

Ohio↗

Archive of digital boomer seismic reflection data collected during USGS cruises 94GFP01, 95GFP01, 96GFP01, 97GFP01, and 98GFP02 in Lakes Pontchartrain, Borgne, and Maurepas, Louisiana, 1994-1998

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the University of New Orleans, the Lake Pontchartrain Basin Foundation, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Coalition to Restore Coastal Louisiana, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the University of Georgia, conducted five geophysical surveys of Lakes Pontchartrain, Borgne, and Maurepas in Louisiana from 1994 to 1998. This report serves as an archive of unprocessed digital boomer seismic reflection data, trackline maps, navigation files, observers' logbooks, GIS information, and formal FGDC metadata. In addition, a filtered and gained digital GIF image of each seismic profile is provided. Refer to the Acronyms page for expansion of acronyms and abbreviations used in this report. The archived trace data are in standard Society of Exploration Geophysicists (SEG) SEG-Y format (Barry and others, 1975) and may be downloaded and processed with commercial or public domain software such as Seismic Unix (SU). Examples of SU processing scripts and in-house (USGS) software for viewing SEG-Y headers (Zihlman, 1992) are also provided. Processed profile images, trackline maps, navigation files, and formal metadata may be viewed with a web browser, and scanned handwritten logbooks may be viewed with Adobe Reader. To access the information contained on these discs, open the file 'index.htm' located at the top level of the discs using a web browser. This report also contains hyperlinks to USGS collaborators and other agencies. These links are only accessible if access to the Internet is available while viewing these documents.

Open-File Report↗

Under the Golden Gate Bridge — Views of the sea floor near the entrance to San Francisco Bay, California

San Francisco Bay in Northern California is one of the largest and most altered estuaries within the United States. The sea floor within the bay as well as at its entrance is constantly changing due to strong tidal currents, aggregate mining, dredge disposal, and the creation of new land using artificial fill. Understanding this dynamic sea floor is critical for addressing local environmental issues, which include defining pollution transport pathways, deciphering tectonics, and identifying benthic habitats. Mapping commercial interests such as safe ship navigation and dredge disposal is also significantly aided by such understanding. Over the past decade, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and California State University, Monterey Bay (CSUMB) in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) and the Center for Integrative Coastal Observation, Research and Education (CICORE) have partnered to map central San Francisco Bay and its entrance under the Golden Gate Bridge using multibeam echosounders. These sonar systems can continuously map to produce 100 percent coverage of the sea floor at meter-scale resolution and thus produce an unprecedented view of the floor of the bay. This poster shows views of the sea floor in west-central San Francisco Bay around Alcatraz and Angel Islands, underneath the Golden Gate Bridge, and through its entrance from the Pacific Ocean. The sea floor is portrayed as a shaded relief surface generated from the multibeam data color-coded for depth from light blues for the shallowest values to purples for the deepest. The land regions are portrayed by USGS digital orthophotographs (DOQs) overlaid on USGS digital elevation models (DEMs). The water depths have a 4x vertical exaggeration while the land areas have a 2x vertical exaggeration.

California↗

Reconnaissance engineering geology of the Skagway area, Alaska, with emphasis on evaluation of earthquake and other geologic hazards

A program to study the engineering geology of most of the larger Alaska coastal communities and to evaluate their earthquake and other geologic hazards was started promptly after the 1964 Alaska earthquake; this report is a product of that program. Field-study methods were largely reconnaissance, and thus the interpretations in the report are subject to revision as further information becomes available. The report provides broad guidelines for planners and engineers when considering geologic factors during preparation of land-use plans. The use of this information should lead to minimizing future loss of life and property, especially during major earthquakes. Skagway was established in 1897 as a seaport near the head of Taiya Inlet fiord in the northern part of southeastern Alaska. Rugged mountains, steep-walled valleys, fiords, and numerous glaciers and icefields characterize the landscape of the area. Valley floors are narrow and most carry large streams, which end in tidewater deltas. Skagway is situated on the delta and lower valley floor of the Skagway River. Glaciers became vastly enlarged during the Pleistocene Epoch and presumably covered the area at least several times. The last major deglaciation probably occurred about 10,000 years ago. Subsequently, there was minor expansion and then partial retreat of glaciers; land rebound because of glacial melting is still going on today. Bedrock is composed predominantly of plutonic intrusive rocks, chiefly quartz diorite and granodiorite, some metamorphic rocks and a few dikes are present. Most bedrock is of Jurassic and Cretaceous age. An assortment of surficial deposits of Quaternary age form the valley bottoms and locally part of the valley walls. Thick deposits of sand and gravel have accumulated as deltas at the heads of fiords and as alluvium in the main stream valleys; deposits may be as much as S8S feet thick at Skagway. Locally, thin deposits mantle some of the steep bedrock slopes and also form some moderately to gently sloping ground. Manmade fill covers much of the top of the delta and floor of the Skagway valley. The fill is composed chiefly of gravel and sand. Quarried blocks of granodiorite are used as riprap to face river dikes and on fill areas exposed to waves of Taiya Inlet. The geologic structure of the area is imperfectly known. However, it appears that plutonic rocks intruded metamorphic rocks in Jurassic and Cretaceous time. Extensive faulting is strongly indicated by the strikingly linear or curvilinear pattern of fiords and many large and small valleys, but no major faults have been positively identified because of concealment by water or surficial deposits. Inferred faults include those coincident with the lower Skagway valley, Taiya Inlet-Taiya valley, and the Katzehin River delta-Upper Dewey Lake. Principal fault movements probably occurred in middle Tertiary time but some movement might have been in late Tertiary or possibly early Quaternary time. Local faults appear to join the Chilkat River fault, a segment of the important Denali fault system, one of the major tectonic elements of southeastern Alaska. One fault segment of this system shows evidence of movement within the last several hundred years. Southeastern Alaska's other major fault system is the active Fairweather-Queen Charlotte Islands fault system'near the coast of the Pacific Ocean. This fault system passes to within about 100 miles of Skagway. At its northwest end the fault system merges with the Chugach-St. Elias fault. One hundred twenty-two earthquakes, some of them strong, have been felt or possibly felt at Skagway during the years 1898 through 1969. The closest large earthquake (magnitude about 8) causing some damage at Skagway occurred July 10, 1958. Its epicenter was about 100 miles to the southwest. Other earthquakes, as much as 150 miles away, also have caused slight to moderate damage. The closest instrumentally recorded earthquake (magnitude 6) had its epicenter about 30 miles to the west of Skagway. Most earthquakes in southeastern Alaska have occurred southwest, west, or northwest of Skagway, near the coast of the Pacific Ocean. They appear to be related to movement along the Fairweather-Queen Charlotte Islands fault system or the Chugach-St. Elias fault. Most have had their epicenters offshore. Some earthquakes may be related to movement at depth along the Denali fault system. The probability of destructive earthquakes at Skagway is unknown because the tectonics of the region have not been studied in detail. However, on the basis of the seismic record and limited tectonic evidence, we suggest that sometime in the future an earthquake of at least magnitude 6 probably will occur very close to the city, a magnitude 7 earthquake might occur in the general area, and an earthquake of magnitude 8 probably will occur at some distance to the southwest, west, or northwest. Effects from nearby large earthquakes could cause extensive damage at Skagway. Nine principal effects are considered. 1. Surface displacement. Displacement of ground caused by fault movement would affect only structures built athwart the fault. However, a sudden tectonic uplift of land of as much as a few feet might affect a wide area and necessitate extensive dredging and wharf rebuilding. On the other hand, a subsidence of several feet would allow tidewater to reach inland and flood part of the harbor facilities and the business district. 2. Ground shaking. Because intensity of ground shaking during earthquakes largely depends on type and water content of the geologic material being shaken, the geologic materials are separated into three categories. Those considered susceptible to strongest shaking are grouped into category 1 (containing materials that are saturated, loose, and of medium- to fine-grain sizes); those of intermediate susceptibility in category 2; and those least susceptible to shaking in category 3. 3. Compaction of some medium-grained sediments during strong earthquake shaking could cause local settling of alluvial and deltaic surfaces. Also, some manmade fills near the harbor might undergo marked differential settling. 4. Liquefaction of saturated beds of uniform, fine sand commonly occurs during strong earthquakes. Few such beds, however, are positively identified at Skagway; some may occur within deltaic and alluvial deposits. If present, these beds might liquefy and cause local settling or trigger landslides. 5. Ejection of water-sediment mixtures from earthquake-induced fractures or from point sources, plus some associated ground subsidence, is common during major earthquakes where saturated sand and fine gravel deposits are confined beneath generally impermeable beds. Some alluvial and deltaic deposits at Skagway probably are susceptible to these processes. Locally, ejecta might cover roads and areas between buildings and fill low-lying areas. Associated ground fracturing might damage roadways, foundations of buildings, and other facilities. 6. Subaerial and subaqueous slides occur frequently during earthquakes. Saturated loose sediments on steep slopes are especially susceptible to sliding. During a major earthquake, surficial deposits forming such slopes along the southeast side of the Skagway valley probably would be subject to sliding or earthflowing on an extensive scale. Some sliding might extend onto the valley floor and damage or destroy buildings and part of the railroad. Rockfalls would be numerous and locally very large rockslides might occur. Subaqueous sliding of the Skagway delta is potentially the most damaging of earthquake effects. Sliding may have occurred there during the earthquake of September 16, 1899; any future major earthquake close to the city would cause extensive sliding, possibly triggered in part by liquefaction. If shaking continued for several minutes, successive slides might progressively remove large portions of the delta and allow extensive land spreading and fracturing of Skagway River alluvium as much as several thousand feet landward from the shoreline. 7. Glacier surfaces commonly receive extensive snow avalanches and rockslides during seismic shaking. In the Skagway area, glaciers may be disrupted at their margins, and resulting blocked streams might form lakes in a few places. If these lakes drained suddenly, downstream areas would he flooded. No long-term effects, such as glacier expansion, are expected. 8. Ground- and surface-water levels often are affected during and after strong earthquake shaking. At Skagway, ground-water levels probably would be lowered, but there would be no permanent change in water quality. Earthquake-triggered landslides could dam the Skagway River; the sudden failure of the dams might cause severe flooding. 9. Waves generated by earthquakes include tsunamis, seiche waves, and waves caused by subaerial and submarine sliding and tectonic displacement of land. Damage in the Skagway area would depend on wave height, tidal stage, and warning time. Some waves triggered by subaerial and subaqueous slides have a strong possibility of reaching heights of as much as 60 feet--or possibly even higher. Tsunamis from the open ocean must travel 160 miles of fiords before reaching Skagway, which allows sufficient time for appraisal of expectable wave height and, if necessary, evacuation of the harbor area and other low-lying ground. Geologic hazards other than those hazards associated with earthquakes include nonearthquake-induced subaerial and subaqueous slides, floods, and slow uplift (rebound) of land. Landslides of moderate size are known to have occurred from time to time during heavy rains such as those of September 1967. Subaqueous slides happen intermittently during the normal growth of deltas. Submarine cables on the floor of northern Taiya Inlet presumably were broken by such slides on September 10, 1927. Flooding by the Skagway River has inundated parts of the city many times, usually during heavy rains in the fall. Two floods were reported to have been caused by the sudden draining of glacier-dammed lakes. Dikes protect the city from many smaller floods, but heightening and broadening is needed to give full protection. Slow land uplift at Skagway, because of regional glacioisostatic rebound, averages 0.059 foot per year. On this basis, the shoreline theoretically shifted seaward 500 feet and the harbor shoaled 4.4 feet between 1897 and 1972. It is recommended that future geologic study of the Skagway area include: detailed geologic mapping and collection of data on geologic materials, joints, faults, and slope stability; complete evaluation of earthquake probability and response of materials to shaking; and collection and evaluation of periodic soundings and sediment data from Skagway and Taiya deltas to assist in forecasting the stability of the delta front.

Alaska↗

Long-term assessments are critical to determining persistence and shoreline protection from oyster reef nature-based coastal defenses

Nature-based coastal defense using bivalve reefs provides a potentially self-sustaining approach for regions facing high coastal land loss, relative sea level rise and increasing frequency and intensity of storms. Success of such nature-based coastal defense depends on the reef-building species' life history, habitat requirements, and ability to thrive through short-term and longer-term environmental variation, yet few projects have reported on outcomes beyond the first few years. In coastal Louisiana, USA, Crassostrea virginica (oyster) is an ecosystem engineer, creating self-sustaining, vertically accreting reefs that also provide ecosystem services. Here, we examine the short (< 3 years) and medium (> 10 years) term outcomes of experimental reefs constructed in 2009 for nature-based coastal defense in a Louisiana, USA estuarine lake. Oyster reef density, demography, along with adjacent salt marsh, and shoreline movement were compared at six fringing shoreline reefs and paired reference sites over the first three years post-construction (2009–2011), and a decade later (2019–2020). Oyster density measured in 2019–2020 (< 60 ind m −2 ) was less than 10% of density measured during 2009–2011 (> 1000 ind m −2 ). This density difference largely reflected a lack of new recruits and small oysters (< 75 mm shell height) in later samples, with adult oyster densities similar between 2011, 2019 and 2020. Lack of smaller oysters in recent sampling likely reflected the impact of multiple extended low salinity events in this region in recent years, including the record-breaking low salinity in 2019. No differences in shoreline characteristics were detected in marsh vegetation, soil properties or nutrient concentrations between reef and reference sites during early and later years. Similarly, shoreline erosion at both reef and reference sites immediately post-construction, and 10 years later, was high (~1 m y −1 ) indicating a lack of shoreline protection from these reefs. These findings highlight the need to consider both current and future conditions, including the effect of extreme years, when implementing nature-based coastal defense. On the other hand, the persistence of reproductive-sized oysters on the reef 10 years post creation, indicate reef resilience and potential for reef development and shoreline benefits, should better site conditions return in future years. Determining restoration success within variable and dynamic environments requires frequent monitoring which is required to understand responses to short and longer-term environmental variation.

Louisiana↗

Reconnaissance engineering geology of Sitka and vicinity, Alaska, with emphasis on evaluation of earthquake and other geologic hazards

A program to study the engineering geology of most of the larger Alaska coastal communities and to evaluate their earthquake and other geologic hazards was started following the 1964 Alaska earthquake; this report about Sitka and vicinity is a product of that program. Field-study methods were of a reconnaissance nature, and thus the interpretations in the report are subject to revision as further information becomes available. This report can provide broad geologic guidelines for planners and engineers during preparation of land-use plans. The use of this information should lead to minimizing future loss of life and property due to geologic hazards, especially during very large earthquakes. Landscape of Sitka and surrounding area is characterized by numerous islands and a narrow strip of gently rolling ground adjacent to rugged mountains; steep valleys and some fiords cut sharply into the mountains. A few valley floors are wide and flat and grade into moderate-sized deltas. Glaciers throughout southeastern Alaska and elsewhere became vastly enlarged during the Pleistocene Epoch. The Sitka area presumably was covered by ice several times; glaciers deeply eroded some valleys and removed fractured bedrock along some faults. The last major deglaciation occurred sometime before 10,000 years ago. Crustal rebound believed to be related to glacial melting caused land emergence at Sitka of at least 35 feet (10.7 m) relative to present sea level. Bedrock at Sitka and vicinity is composed mostly of bedded, hard, dense graywacke and some argillite. Beds strike predominantly northwest and are vertical or steeply dipping. Locally, bedded rocks are cut by dikes of fine-grained igneous rock. Host bedrock is of Jurassic and Cretaceous age. Eight types of surficial deposits of Quaternary age were recognized. Below altitudes of 3S feet (10.7 m), the dominant deposits are those of modern and elevated shores and deltas; at higher altitudes, widespread muskeg overlies a mantle of volcanic ash which commonly overlies glacial drift. Alluvial deposits are minor. Man-emplaced embankment fill, chiefly sandy gravel, covers many muskeg and former offshore areas; quarried blocks of graywacke are placed to form breakwaters and to edge large areas of embankment fill and modified ground. The geologic structure of the area is known only in general outlines. Most bedded Mesozoic rocks probably are part of broad northwest-trending complexes of anticlines and synclines. Intrusion of large bodies of plutonic igneous rocks occurred in Tertiary and Cretaceous time. Extensive faulting is suggested by the numerous linear to gently curving patterns of some fiords, lakes, and valleys, and by a group of Holocene volcanoes and cinder cones. Two major northwest-striking fault zones are most prominent: (1) the apparently inactive Chichagof-Sitka fault, about 2.5 miles (4.0 km) northeast of Sitka, and {2) part of the active 800-mile- (1,200-km) long Fairweather-Queen Charlotte Islands fault system, lying about 30 miles (48 km) southwest of the city. Many earthquakes have been reported as felt at Sitka since 1832, when good records were first maintained; several shocks were very strong, but none of them caused severe damage. The closest major earthquake (magnitude about 7.3) causing some damage to the city occurred July 30, 1972, and had an epicenter about 30 miles (48 km) to the southwest. Movement along the Fairweather-Queen Charlotte Islands fault system apparently caused most of the earthquakes felt at Sitka. The probability of destructive earthquakes at Sitka is unknown. The tectonics of the region and the seismic record suggest that sometime in the future an earthquake of a magnitude of about 8 and related to the Fairweather-Queen Charlotte Islands fault system probably will occur in or near the area. Effects from some nearby major earthquakes could cause substantial damage at Sitka. Eight possible effects are as follows: 1. Sudden dis

Open-File Report↗

Flood hazards— A national threat

In the late summer of 2005, the remarkable flooding brought by Hurricane Katrina, which caused more than \$ 200 billion in losses, constituted the costliest natural disaster in U.S. history. However, even in typical years, flooding causes billions of dollars in damage and threatens lives and property in every State. Natural processes, such as hurricanes, weather systems, and snowmelt, can cause floods. Failure of levees and dams and inadequate drainage in urban areas can also result in flooding. On average, floods kill about 140 people each year and cause \$6 billion in property damage. Although loss of life to floods during the past half-century has declined, mostly because of improved warning systems, economic losses have continued to rise due to increased urbanization and coastal development.

Fact Sheet↗

Georgia's Surface-Water Resources and Streamflow Monitoring Network, 2008

Surface water provides 5 billion gallons per day, or 78 percent, of the total freshwater used (including thermoelectric) in Georgia (Fanning, 2003). Climate, geology, and landforms control the natural distribution of Georgia's water resources. Georgia is a 'headwaters' State, with most of the rivers beginning in northern Georgia and increasing in size downstream (see map at right for major watersheds). Surface water is the primary source of water in the northern one-half of the State, including the Atlanta metropolitan area, where limited ground-water resources are difficult to obtain. In Georgia, periodic droughts exacerbate competition for surface-water supplies. Many areas of Georgia also face a threat of flooding because of spring frontal thunderstorms and the potential for hurricanes from both the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. As the population of Georgia increases, these flood risks will increase with development in flood-risk zones, particularly in the coastal region.

Georgia↗

Coastal processes influencing water quality at Great Lakes beaches

In a series of studies along the Great Lakes, U.S. Geological Survey scientists are examining the physical processes that influence concentrations of fecal indicator bacteria and related pathogens at recreational beaches. These studies aim to estimate human health risk, improve management strategies, and understand the fate and transport of microbes in the nearshore area. It was determined that embayed beaches act as traps, accumulating Escherichia coli (E. coli) and other bacteria in the basin and even in beach sand. Further, shear stress and wave run-up could resuspend accumulated bacteria, leading to water-contamination events. These findings are being used to target beach design and circulation projects. In previous research, it was determined that E. coli followed a diurnal pattern, with concentrations decreasing throughout the day, largely owing to solar inactivation, but rebounding overnight. Studies at a Chicago beach identified the impact of wave-induced mass transport on this phenomenon, a finding that will extend our understanding of bacterial fate in the natural environment. In another series of studies, scientists examined the impact of river outfalls on bacteria concentrations, using mechanistic and empirical modeling. Through these studies, the models can indicate range and extent of impact, given E. coli concentration in the source water. These findings have been extended to extended lengths of coastlines and have been applied in beach management using empirical predictive modeling. Together, these studies are helping scientists identify and eliminate threats to human and coastal health.

Great Lakes Beaches↗

Coastal change during Hurricane Dennis 2005

Hurricane Dennis made landfall as a Category 3 storm on Santa Rosa Island in the Florida Panhandle on July 10, 2005. Exposed to some of the strongest winds, Santa Rosa Island suffered erosion, as well as severe overwash. A storm surge of 2 m was recorded near Navarre Beach. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) are collaborating in a research project investigating coastal change that occurred as a result of Hurricane Dennis. The USGS acquired still oblique aerial photography both before and after hurricane landfall to better understand the impacts of extreme storms on coastal environments. On Tuesday, July 12, 2005, scientists conducted an aerial photographic survey of Santa Rosa Island, Florida, that was impacted by Hurricane Dennis. The photographs were compared to pre-Dennis photographs taken in July 2001 and after the landfall of Hurricane Ivan in September 2004 to illustrate extreme coastal change. On Santa Rosa Island, the storm eroded dunes and beaches, and overwashed roads. In Navarre Beach, parking lots and roads were covered with sand and dune walkovers damaged or destroyed.

Florida↗