SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Science”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

USGS2023

Colorado River Basin Actionable and Strategic Integrated Science and Technology (ASIST) pilot project progress toward an information management and technology plan

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey carries out a wide variety of multidisciplinary science projects through the Bureau’s regions, mission areas, programs, and science centers. However, this structure can limit interactions among individual scientists, segregate data holdings, and make it difficult to apply holistic, interdisciplinary science. In addition, technological advances in sensors, data storage and analysis, computing power, and networking have resulted in an exponential growth in the volume, variety, and complexity of data. To address some of these challenges, the U.S. Geological Survey initiated the Colorado River Basin Actionable and Strategic Integrated Science and Technology (ASIST) pilot project to facilitate interdisciplinary science in the drought-stricken basin and apply information management and technology (IMT) resources that can be used to deliver actionable science efficiently and effectively. In fiscal year 2021, the Data Management and Advanced Technology subgroup of the ASIST pilot project worked toward developing an IMT plan that includes several advanced IMT solutions that are being implemented Bureau-wide by the Office of the Associate Chief Information Officer. This plan identifies applications, opportunities, and steps to leverage new and existing technologies, data, models, and knowledge to support integrated science projects across the Colorado River Basin. The subgroup also created an inventory of available IMT resources and their locations. The Colorado River Basin ASIST pilot project also developed a multiyear approach to build capacity for supporting integrated science projects in the Colorado River Basin, which provides an advanced IMT framework for expediting the production of interdisciplinary science related to the basin.

Colorado River basin↗

USGS2008

Fort Collins Science Center: Fiscal Year 2007 Accomplishments

In Fiscal Year 2007 (FY07), the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Fort Collins Science Center (FORT) continued research vital to U.S. Department of the Interior science and management needs and associated USGS programmatic goals. FORT work also supported the science needs of other government agencies as well as private cooperators. Specifically, FORT scientific research and technical assistance focused on client and partner needs and goals in the areas of biological information management, fisheries and aquatic systems, invasive species, status and trends of biological resources, terrestrial ecosystems, and wildlife resources. In addition, FORT's 5-year strategic plan was refined to incorporate focus areas identified in the USGS strategic science plan, including ecosystem-landscape analysis, global climate change, and energy and mineral resource development. As a consequence, several science projects initiated in FY07 were either entirely new research dor amplifications of existing work. Highlights of FORT project accomplishments are described below under the USGS science program with which each task is most closely associated. The work of FORT's 6 branches (Aquatic Systems and Technology Applications, Ecosystem Dynamics, Information Science, Invasive Species Science, Policy Analysis and Science Assistance, and Species and Habitats of Federal Interest) often involves major partnerships with other agencies or cooperation with other USGS disciplines (Geology, Geography, Water Resources) and the Geospatial Information Office.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2016

U.S. Geological Survey science strategy for highly pathogenic avian influenza in wildlife and the environment (2016–2020)

Introduction Through the Science Strategy for Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) in Wildlife and the Environment, the USGS will assess avian influenza (AI) dynamics in an ecological context to inform decisions made by resource managers and policymakers from the local to national level. Through collection of unbiased scientific information on the ecology of AI viruses and wildlife hosts in a changing world, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) will enhance the development of AI forecasting tools and ensure this information is integrated with a quality decision process for managing HPAI. The overall goal of this USGS Science Strategy for HPAI in Wildlife and the Environment goes beyond documenting the occurrence and distribution of AI viruses in wild birds. The USGS aims to understand the epidemiological processes and environmental factors that influence HPAI distribution and describe the mechanisms of transmission between wild birds and poultry. USGS scientists developed a conceptual model describing the process linking HPAI dispersal in wild waterfowl to the outbreaks in poultry. This strategy focuses on five long-term science goals, which include: Science Goal 1—Augment the National HPAI Surveillance Plan; Science Goal 2—Determine mechanisms of HPAI disease spread in wildlife and the environment; Science Goal 3—Characterize HPAI viruses circulating in wildlife; Science Goal 4—Understand implications of avian ecology on HPAI spread; and Science Goal 5—Develop HPAI forecasting and decision-making tools. These goals will help define and describe the processes outlined in the conceptual model with the ultimate goal of facilitating biosecurity and minimizing transfer of diseases across the wildlife-poultry interface. The first four science goals are focused on scientific discovery and the fifth goal is application-based. Decision analyses in the fifth goal will guide prioritization of proposed actions in the first four goals.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2019

Climate adaptation Science Centers—Annual report for 2018

2018 marked the 10-year anniversary of the establishment of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center! With the passage of the fiscal year 2018 budget on March 23, 2018, our program name was changed from the National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center to the National Climate Adaptation Science Center (NCASC). The eight regional Department of the Interior (DOI) Climate Science Centers were renamed Climate Adaptation Science Centers (CASCs). The name changes more clearly align the national and regional centers and emphasize their focus on meeting natural resource adaptation needs. Although the program has a new name, our mission has not changed. We are still hard at work delivering science to help fish, wildlife, water, land, and people adapt to a changing climate. During the past 10 years, the NCASC and the eight regional CASCs funded over 425 science projects and built a network of research partners, resource management stakeholders, interdisciplinary staff, fellows, and early career researchers. In celebration of our work and accomplishments over the last 10 years, the NCASC began a monthly web post series on “10 Things You May Not Know” about topics our science has focused on, including drought, glaciers, and wildfire. Additionally, CASCs that had completed their initial hosting agreement with the USGS underwent a formal review and recompetition process. New hosting agreements were awarded to the Southwest and North Central CASCs in 2018. Read the 2018 annual report to learn more about the CASCs' great science, partnerships, capacity building, and more from 2018.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2023

Integrated rangeland fire management strategy actionable science plan completion assessment: Invasives topic, 2015–20

Loss and degradation of sagebrush rangelands due to an accelerated invasive annual grass-wildfire cycle and other stressors are significant management, conservation, and economic issues in the western United States. These sagebrush rangelands comprise a unique biome spanning 11 states, support over 350 wildlife species, and provide important ecosystem services that include stabilizing the economies of western communities. Impacts to sagebrush ecosystem processes over large areas due to the annual grass-wildfire cycle necessitated the development of a coordinated, science-based strategy for improving efforts to achieve long-term protection, conservation, and restoration of sagebrush rangelands, which was framed in 2015 under the Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy (IRFMS). Central to this effort was the development of an Actionable Science Plan (Plan) that identified 37 priority science needs (Needs) for informing the actions proposed under the 5 topics (Fire, Invasives, Restoration, Sagebrush and Sage-Grouse, Climate and Weather) that were part of the collective focus of the IRFMS. Notable keys to this effort were identification of the Needs co-produced by managers and researchers, and a focus on resulting science being “actionable.” Substantial investments aimed at fulfilling the Needs identified in the Plan have been made since its release in 2016. While the state of the science has advanced considerably, the extent to which knowledge gaps remain relative to identified Needs is relatively unknown. Moreover, new Needs have likely emerged since the original strategy as results from actionable science reveal new questions and possible (yet untested) solutions. A quantifiable assessment of the progress made on the original science Needs can identify unresolved gaps and new information that can help inform prioritization of future research efforts. This report details a systematic literature review that evaluated how well peer-reviewed journal articles and formal technical reports published between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, addressed six needs (hereinafter “Needs”) identified under the Invasives topic in the Plan. The topic outlined research Needs related to the control of invasive plant species in sagebrush rangelands, with a special emphasis on invasive annual grasses. We established the level of progress towards addressing each Need following a standardized set of criteria, and developed summaries detailing how research objectives nested within Needs identified in the Plan (“Next Steps”) were either addressed well, partially addressed, or remain outstanding (that is, addressed poorly) in the literature through 2020. Our searches resulted in the inclusion of 198 science products that at least partially addressed a Need identified in the Invasives topic. The Needs that were well and partially addressed included: studies of natural and anthropogenic factors influencing the distribution and spread; methods of preventing, eradicating and controlling invasive plant species; development of mapping techniques that provide regularly updated annual grass and fine fuel projections; and assessment of the efficacy of potential cheatgrass biocontrol agents. Needs that were addressed poorly included (1) investigations of livestock grazing as a tool for managing invasive plants and (2) investigations of cheatgrass die-offs and identification and subsequent study of potential biocontrol agents associated with those die-offs. The information provided in this assessment will assist updating the Plan along with other science strategies.

western United States↗

USGS2023

Integrated rangeland fire management strategy actionable science plan completion assessment: Restoration topic, 2015–20

Loss and degradation of sagebrush rangelands due to an accelerated invasive annual grass-wildfire cycle and other stressors are substantial management, conservation, and economic issues in the western United States. These sagebrush rangelands comprise a unique biome spanning 11 states, support over 350 wildlife species, and provide important ecosystem services that include stabilizing the economies of western communities. Impacts to sagebrush ecosystem processes over large areas due to the annual grass-wildfire cycle necessitated the development of a coordinated, science-based strategy for improving efforts to achieve long-term protection, conservation, and restoration of sagebrush rangelands, which was framed in 2015 under the Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy (IRFMS). Central to this effort was the development of an Actionable Science Plan (Plan) that identified 37 priority science needs (Needs) for informing the actions proposed under the 5 topics (Fire, Invasives, Restoration, Sagebrush and Sage-Grouse, Climate and Weather) that were part of the collective focus of the IRFMS. Notable keys to this effort were identification of the Needs co-produced by managers and researchers, and a focus on resulting science being “actionable.” Substantial investments aimed at fulfilling the Needs identified in the Plan have been made since its release in 2016. While the state of the science has advanced considerably, the extent to which knowledge gaps remain relative to identified Needs is relatively unknown. Moreover, new Needs have likely emerged since the original strategy as results from actionable science reveal new questions, and possible (yet untested) solutions. A quantifiable assessment of the progress made on the original science Needs can identify unresolved gaps and new information that can help inform prioritization of future research efforts. This report details a systematic literature review that evaluated how well peer-reviewed journal articles and formal technical reports published between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, addressed 10 needs (hereinafter “Needs”) identified under the Restoration topic in the Plan. The topic outlined research Needs for improving restoration success in degraded sagebrush rangelands. We established the level of progress towards addressing each Need following a standardized set of criteria, and developed summaries detailing how research objectives nested within Needs identified in the Plan (“Next Steps”) were either addressed well, partially addressed or remain outstanding (that is, addressed poorly) in the literature through 2020. Our searches resulted in the inclusion of 371 science products that at least partially addressed a Need identified in the Restoration topic. The Needs that were well and partially addressed included: the development of methods to improve seeding success of native plants after fire; evaluation of short- and long-term plant responses relative to biotic and abiotic factors following restoration treatments; assessments of long-term effects on ecosystem processes following conifer removal treatments and development of decision support tools to aid in conifer management; determination of the costs of restoration treatments relative to the benefits to sage-grouse occupancy, survival, and populations; and assessments of the factors which contribute to soil degradation and development of soil enhancement methods that enhance seed germination and seedling survival while resisting nonnative plants. Needs that were not addressed well included: the development of methods for the rapid recovery of sagebrush and native herbaceous plants following wildfire and determination of whether treatments benefit sage-grouse and mitigate impacts from fires; determination of thresholds for successful restoration across a range of environmental conditions and development of decision support tools to assist with restoration effectiveness monitoring; and development and evaluation of the utility of seed transfer zones. The information provided in this assessment will assist updating the Plan along with other science strategies.

western United States↗

USGS2023

Integrated rangeland fire management strategy actionable science plan completion assessment—Fire topic, 2015–20

Loss and degradation of sagebrush rangelands due to an accelerated invasive annual grass-wildfire cycle and other stressors are significant management, conservation, and economic issues in the western United States. These sagebrush rangelands comprise a unique biome spanning 11 states, support over 350 wildlife species, and provide important ecosystem services that include stabilizing the economies of western communities. Impacts to sagebrush ecosystem processes over large areas due to the annual grass-wildfire cycle necessitated the development of a coordinated, science-based strategy for improving efforts to achieve long-term protection, conservation, and restoration of sagebrush rangelands, which was framed in 2015 under the Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy (IRFMS). Central to this effort was the development of an Actionable Science Plan (Plan) that identified 37 priority science needs (Needs) for informing the actions proposed under the 5 topics (Fire, Invasives, Restoration, Sagebrush and Sage-Grouse, Climate and Weather) that were part of the collective focus of the IRFMS. Notable keys to this effort were identification of the Needs co-produced by managers and researchers, and a focus on resulting science being “actionable.” Substantial investments aimed at fulfilling the Needs identified in the Plan have been made since its release in 2016. While the state of the science has advanced considerably, the extent to which knowledge gaps remain relative to identified Needs is relatively unknown. Moreover, new Needs have likely emerged since the original strategy as results from actionable science reveal new questions and possible (yet untested) solutions. A quantifiable assessment of the progress made on the original science Needs can identify unresolved gaps and new information that can help inform prioritization of future research efforts. This report details a systematic literature review that evaluated how well peer-reviewed journal articles and formal technical reports published between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, addressed eight needs (hereinafter known as “Needs”) identified under the Fire topic in the Plan, defined as any non-structure fire that occurs in vegetation or natural fuels, including wildfires and prescribed fires. The topic outlined research Needs broadly focused on understanding the mechanisms and management of threats posed to the maintenance of large, contiguous sagebrush rangelands by fire. We established the level of progress towards addressing each Need following a standardized set of criteria, and developed summaries detailing how research objectives nested within Needs identified in the Plan (‘Next Steps’) were either addressed well, partially addressed or remain outstanding (in other words., addressed poorly) in the literature through 2020. Our searches resulted in the inclusion of 156 science products that at least partially addressed a Need identified in the Fire topic. The Needs that were well and partially addressed included: studies of relationships between fire and the sagebrush ecosystem (Need 1) investigations of the responses of sage-grouse to burned area characteristics (Need 2); spatial modeling of fire risk (Need 3); studies of the effects of fuels management treatments (Need 4); sagebrush reduction treatments on multiple characteristics of the sagebrush ecosystem (Need 6); and assessments of the role of fire in maintaining healthy sagebrush communities (Need 7). Needs addressed poorly included: assessments of the effects of fuel breaks on sage-grouse (Need 5); and investigations of characteristics associated with the effectiveness of fuel breaks (Need 8). The information provided in this assessment will assist updating the Plan along with other science strategies.

western United States↗

USGS2023

Integrated rangeland fire management strategy actionable science plan completion assessment — Sagebrush and sage-grouse topic, 2015–20

Loss and degradation of sagebrush rangelands due to an accelerated invasive annual grass-wildfire cycle and other stressors are significant management, conservation, and economic issues in the western United States. These sagebrush rangelands comprise a unique biome spanning 11 states, support over 350 wildlife species, and provide important ecosystem services that include stabilizing the economies of western communities. Impacts to sagebrush ecosystem processes over large areas due to the annual grass-wildfire cycle necessitated the development of a coordinated, science-based strategy for improving efforts to achieve long-term protection, conservation, and restoration of sagebrush rangelands, which was framed in 2015 under the Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy (IRFMS). Central to this effort was the development of an Actionable Science Plan (Plan) that identified 37 priority science needs (Needs) for informing the actions proposed under the 5 topics (Fire, Invasives, Restoration, Sagebrush and Sage-Grouse, Climate and Weather) that were part of the collective focus of the IRFMS. Notable keys to this effort were identification of the Needs co-produced by managers and researchers, and a focus on resulting science being “actionable.” Substantial investments aimed at fulfilling the Needs identified in the Plan have been made since its release in 2016. While the state of the science has advanced considerably, the extent to which knowledge gaps remain relative to identified Needs is relatively unknown. Moreover, new Needs have likely emerged since the original strategy as results from actionable science reveal new questions and possible (yet untested) solutions. A quantifiable assessment of the progress made on the original science Needs can identify unresolved gaps and new information that can help inform prioritization of future research efforts. This report details a systematic literature review that evaluated how well peer-reviewed journal articles and formal technical reports published between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, addressed nine needs (hereinafter, “Needs”) identified under the Sagebrush and Sage-Grouse topic in the Plan. The topic outlined research Needs broadly focused on understanding sagebrush rangelands and population dynamics important for the conservation and management of sage-grouse and other sagebrush-reliant wildlife species. We established the level of progress towards addressing each Need following a standardized set of criteria, and developed summaries detailing how research objectives nested within Needs identified in the Plan (‘Next Steps’) were either addressed well, partially addressed or remain outstanding (in other words, addressed poorly) in the literature through 2020. Our searches resulted in the inclusion of 333 science products that at least partially addressed a Need identified in the Sagebrush and Sage-Grouse topic. The Needs that were well and partially addressed included: development of biome-wide mapping techniques that provide regularly updated grassland and shrubland vegetation layers (Need 4); generation of spatially explicit greater sage-grouse habitat suitability and population models (Need 5); identification of greater sage-grouse seasonal habitats (Need 6); identification of thresholds for the extent of threats, especially conifer expansion, above which greater sage-grouse and other sagebrush-obligate species cannot persist (Need 8); and studies of sagebrush community dynamics as those relate to management and restoration of sagebrush rangelands (Need 9). Needs addressed poorly included: investigations of factors conducive and restrictive to greater sage-grouse movement patterns and population connectivity (Need 1); investigations of livestock and other large ungulate (for example, feral horse) grazing effects on greater sage-grouse populations and habitats (Need 2); identification of thresholds of disturbance (especially renewable energy developments) below which greater sage-grouse and other sagebrush reliant species are not impacted (Need 3); and studies of habitat relationships for sagebrush-reliant species other than greater sage-grouse, songbirds, and small mammals (Need 7). The information provided in this assessment will assist updating the Plan along with other science strategies.

western United States↗

USGS2023

Integrated rangeland fire management strategy actionable science plan completion assessment— Climate and weather topic, 2015–20

Loss and degradation of sagebrush ( Artemisia spp.) rangelands due to an accelerated invasive annual grass-wildfire cycle and other stressors are significant management, conservation, and economic issues in the western U.S. These sagebrush rangelands comprise a unique biome spanning 11 states, support over 350 wildlife species, and provide important ecosystem services that include stabilizing the economies of western communities. Impacts to sagebrush ecosystem processes over large areas due to the annual grass-wildfire cycle necessitated the development of a coordinated, science-based strategy for improving efforts to achieve long-term protection, conservation, and restoration of sagebrush rangelands, which was framed in 2015 under the Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy (IRFMS). Central to this effort was the development of an Actionable Science Plan (Plan) that identified 37 priority science needs (hereinafter, “Needs”) for informing the actions proposed under the five topics (Fire, Invasives, Restoration, Sagebrush and Sage-Grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ), Climate and Weather) that were part of the collective focus of the IRFMS. Notable keys to this effort were identification of the Needs co-produced by managers and researchers, and a focus on resulting science being “actionable.” Substantial investments aimed at fulfilling the Needs identified in the Plan have been made since its release in 2016. While the state of the science has advanced considerably, the extent to which knowledge gaps remain relative to identified Needs is relatively unknown. Moreover, new Needs have likely emerged since the original strategy as results from actionable science reveal new questions and possible (yet untested) solutions. A quantifiable assessment of the progress made on the original science Needs can identify unresolved gaps and new information that can help inform prioritization of future research efforts. This report details a systematic literature review that evaluated how well peer-reviewed journal articles and formal technical reports published between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, addressed four Needs identified under the Climate and Weather topic in the Plan. The topic outlined research Needs broadly focused on understanding the potential effects of climate change on vegetative resilience to inform restoration of sagebrush rangelands. We established the level of progress towards addressing each Need following a standardized set of criteria, and developed summaries detailing how research objectives nested within Needs identified in the Plan (hereinafter, “Next Steps”) were either addressed well, partially addressed or remain outstanding (that is, addressed poorly) in the literature through 2020. Our searches resulted in the inclusion of 92 science products that at least partially addressed a Need identified in the Climate and Weather topic. The Needs that were well and partially addressed included: studies of the complex set of climatic relationships that influence sagebrush rangeland restoration and seeding success; the identification of seed collection areas across the range of environmental variability inhabited by target restoration species; and develop predictive models to assess targeted restoration species’ responses to mid-century climatic conditions. The Need addressed poorly was the identification of native plant species, genotypes and ecotypes, and seed mixes that may be resilient to a changing climate. The information provided in this assessment will assist updating the Plan, and can inform updates of other relevant science planning documents as needed.

Open-File Report↗

USGS1975

Use of USGS earth science products by city planning agencies in the San Francisco Bay region, California

An inventory of the use of USGS products in selected planning studies, plans, plan implementation devices, and other planning-related activities was completed for the ninety-one cities in the nine-county San Francisco Bay region. This inventory was designed to determine and document the use of the 85 earth science products prepared as a part of the San Francisco Bay Region Environment and Resources Planning Study (SFBRS). This inventory showed that: (1) three-fourths of the cities had planning staffs who were familiar with SFBRS products, or had made use of such products; (2) over half of the cities had prepared planning documents which contained references to SFBRS products; (3) the types of planning applications most often indicated were: geologic hazards studies; seismic safety, public safety, conservation, and open-space plan elements; general reference; and the preparation and review of environmental impact reports and statements; (4) almost 90 percent of all 85 SFBRS products were used at least once for a city planning activity, and one product was used at least 67 times for various city planning activities; and (5) at least forty-five other other USGS products were also used for various city planning activities. All of the seven SFBRS products that were used 30 or more times for city planning activities were small-scale, large-areal-coverage, hazard-type products. Each product is interpretative and contains additional data which makes it more relevant or more interesting. The planning staffs of each city were also interviewed and asked to indicate any problems in the use of the SFBRS products, to recommend improvements, and to identify any needed or desired earth science data. The responses showed that: (1) the map scales commonly used by cities were much larger than 1:12,000; (2) few cities had planning staffs with training or experience in the earth sciences or engineering; (3) less than one-fourth of the cities failed to use SFBRS products-primarily because their staffs were unaware of the SFBRS, unfamiliar with its products, or lacked adequate capability; (4) almost two-thirds of the cities expressed some problems in using the products-primarily scale and detail; (5) over two-thirds of the cities expressed an interest in continuing to use, or planning to use, the SFBRS products in the future, and a need or desire for additional earth science, engineering or other data; and (6) over one-half of the cities suggested improvements-primarily larger scale or more detail and less technical or more interpretative products. From the inventory and responses to the interviews, it is concluded that the cities in the Bay region have considerable familiarity with, and have made substantial use of, SFBRS products. This use was made by many cities despite their small size, limited staff capability, and the design of the products which was intended primarily for regional planning at a regional scale. Suggestions are made to ensure more familiarity with, and more effective use of, earth science data in the future. These suggestions include: (1) providing engineering interpretations and land-use capability ratings to make earth science data more readily usable; (2) monitoring and analyzing new state laws and regulations to better anticipate and respond to local earth science data needs; (3) including technical assistance with any earth science data designed for planners and decision-makers; (4) providing larger scale and greater detail earth science data on a demonstration basis; (5) giving priority to urban and urbanizing areas so as to conserve limited staff resources; and (6) ensuring product distribution to all potential users.

California↗

USGS1976

Use of USGS earth-science products by county planning agencies in the San Francisco Bay region, California

An inventory of the use of USGS products in selected planning studies, plans, ordinances, and other planning activities was made for eight counties in the San Francisco Bay region--a region of almost five million people. This inventory was designed to determine and document the use of the 87 earth-science information products prepared as a part of the San Francisco Bay Region Environment and Resources Planning Study (SFBRS). The inventory showed that: (1) all eight counties had planning staffs who were very familiar with SFBRS products and had made frequent use of such products; (2) all eight counties had prepared planning documents which cite SFBRS products; (3) the types of planning applications most often indicated were: geologic hazards studies, seismic safety and public safety plan elements, general reference, and the preparation and review of environmental impact reports and statements; (4) over 90 percent of the 87 SFBRS products were used at least once, and nine of the products were used over 30 times each for various county planning activities; and (5) at least 85 other USGS products were also used for various county planning activities. After the inventory, selected county officials, employees, and consultants were interviewed and asked--among other things--to indicate any problems in the use of the SFBRS products, to suggest improvements, and to identify any needed or desired earth-science information. The responses showed that: (1) the scales commonly used for working maps were 1:62,500 or larger and for plan implementation were 1:24,000 or larger; (2) only one county had a geologist on its planning staff, although six others had the benefit of geotechnical services from private consulting firms, county engineering staffs, or the State Division of Mines and Geology; (3) seven of the eight counties expressed some problems in using the products, primarily because of their small scale or lack of detail; (4) all eight counties expected to continue to use the products and expressed a need or desire for additional earth-science, engineering, or other information; (5) all eight counties suggested specific improvements to future products, primarily larger scale or more detail and fewer technical or more interpretive products; and (6) all eight counties received educational, advisory, and review services from USGS personnel. Seventeen selected examples of the application of SFBRS products to various county planning activities are discussed and illustrated. These examples include four planning studies, seven plans, and two ordinances. From the inventory and responses to the interviews, it is concluded that the counties in the Bay region are very familiar with, have made frequent use of, and will continue to use SFBRS products for a wide range of county planning activities. Suggestions to ensure more effective use of earth-science information in the future include: (1) monitoring emerging critical issues and analyzing new state and federal laws and regulations so as to better anticipate and respond to county earth-science information needs; (2) creating a users advisory committee to help identify critical issues and user needs; (3) providing engineering interpretations and land- and water-use capability ratings to make earth-science information more readily usable; (4) giving priority to areas impacted by development so as to husband staff resources; (5) providing earth-science information at the larger scale and greater detail commonly used and needed by counties; (6) releasing earth-science information earlier and according to a formal distribution pattern; and (7) providing educational, advisory, and review services in connection with any earth-science information designed for planners and decisionmakers.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2026

Science strategy for Cotoni-Coast Dairies, an onshore unit of the California Coastal National Monument

This science strategy describes the scientific mission of the unit, science previously conducted on or near the unit, and the partners who have given considerable effort to produce this science. Further, it identifies priority science needs, outlines the unit’s plan to meet those science needs in coordination with partners, shares scientific protocols for conducting new research, and identifies systems of communication to help ensure science information generated from this research is shared throughout BLM, with partners, and with the public. These components of the science strategy are intended to help achieve the fundamental goals of the effort: to support and expand partnerships while identifying priority science information needs of unit staff and partners and clearly outlining pathways for conducting, communicating, and applying that science.

California↗

USGS2022

The potential of semi-structured citizen science data as a supplement for conservation decision-making: Validating the performance of eBird against targeted avian monitoring efforts

Methods are being developed to capitalize on citizen science data for research and monitoring, but these data are rarely used within established decision-making frameworks of wildlife agencies. Citizen science data are often collected at higher resolution and extent than targeted monitoring programs, and may provide complementary information. Here, we demonstrate that carefully filtered semi-structured citizen science observations, when paired with targeted survey data, can produce ecological predictions at higher resolution and extent than targeted surveys alone, and both datasets can represent complementary aspects of species' ecology. We present case studies demonstrating how citizen science data can enhance or supplement decision-making of government and conservation organizations. First, we show how the continuous spatial coverage of citizen science projects, when coupled with targeted surveys, can improve estimates of metrics used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in regulatory processes to estimate population size, and inform take limits of federally managed species nationwide. Second, we show that the spatial coverage of citizen science accommodates dynamic avian space use patterns during key times of the year, relative to standardized monitoring protocols carried out by the Illinois Natural History Survey. Lastly, we demonstrate that citizen science information can replicate estimates of migratory chronologies for the Illinois Natural History Survey and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for some waterfowl species, and in some contexts can supplement missing data on abundance. These findings illustrate the value of integrating validated information from semi-structured citizen science into the current evidence base used to justify, inform, and evaluate conservation decision-making.

California, Illinois, Iowa, Missouri↗

USGS2013

U.S. Geological Survey natural hazards science strategy— Promoting the safety, security, and economic well-being of the Nation

Executive Summary The mission of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in natural hazards is to develop and apply hazard science to help protect the safety, security, and economic well-being of the Nation. The costs and consequences of natural hazards can be enormous, and each year more people and infrastructure are at risk. USGS scientific research—founded on detailed observations and improved understanding of the responsible physical processes—can help to understand and reduce natural hazard risks and to make and effectively communicate reliable statements about hazard characteristics, such as frequency, magnitude, extent, onset, consequences, and where possible, the time of future events. To accomplish its broad hazard mission, the USGS maintains an expert workforce of scientists and technicians in the earth sciences, hydrology, biology, geography, social and behavioral sciences, and other fields, and engages cooperatively with numerous agencies, research institutions, and organizations in the public and private sectors, across the Nation and around the world. The scientific expertise required to accomplish the USGS mission in natural hazards includes a wide range of disciplines that this report refers to, in aggregate, as hazard science. In October 2010, the Natural Hazards Science Strategy Planning Team (H–SSPT) was charged with developing a long-term (10-year) Science Strategy for the USGS mission in natural hazards. This report fulfills that charge, with a document hereinafter referred to as the Strategy, to provide scientific observations, analyses, and research that are critical for the Nation to become more resilient to natural hazards. Science provides the information that decisionmakers need to determine whether risk management activities are worthwhile. Moreover, as the agency with the perspective of geologic time, the USGS is uniquely positioned to extend the collective experience of society to prepare for events outside current memory. The USGS has critical statutory and nonstatutory roles regarding floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, landslides, coastal erosion, volcanic eruptions, wildfires, and magnetic storms—the hazards considered in this plan. There are numerous other hazards of societal importance that are considered either only peripherally or not at all in this Strategy because they are either in another of the USGS strategic science plans (such as drought) or not in the overall mission of the USGS (such as tornados).

Circular↗

USGS2025

U.S. Geological Survey Colorado River Basin science and technology collaboration meetings on drought (2021)—Synthesis of findings

Ongoing, prolonged, and severe drought and water overuse during the first two decades of the 21st century have reduced water supplies of the Colorado River Basin, with effects cascading to ecosystems and human communities throughout the basin. In June and July 2021, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Colorado River Basin Actionable and Strategic Integrated Science and Technology initiative team held a series of 12 collaboration meetings with USGS scientists and managers to discuss complicated, integrated science challenges and solutions related to drought in the Colorado River Basin. These Science and Technology collaboration meetings were structured to identify challenges experienced by meeting participants when working on complex problems, explore opportunities for coproducing scientific information, and envision future collaborative programs that leverage new technology. The 12 meetings were attended by 79 USGS staff representing 43 unique affiliations (for example, USGS science centers, mission areas, and regional offices). Meeting participants submitted 865 individual responses to six general discussion prompt topics (“Challenges,” “Knowledge Gaps,” “Existing Capabilities,” “Strategies and Actions,” “Example Applications,” and “Next Steps”) using a structured online collaboration tool. However, specific questions or tasks from each general discussion prompt varied by meeting topic. Terms from the USGS Thesaurus ( https://apps.usgs.gov/thesaurus/ ) and USGS Data Lifecycle Model ( https://www.usgs.gov/data-management/data-lifecycle ) were used to identify and summarize participant responses relevant to science integration, stakeholder engagement, and information management technology. From these responses, opportunities for the Colorado River Basin Actionable and Strategic Integrated Science and Technology initiative to facilitate science integration in the Colorado River Basin are highlighted in this report, including (a) pursuing specific interdisciplinary research topics that require integrating knowledge across spatial and temporal scales, (b) connecting scientists across disciplines, (c) reducing barriers to stakeholder engagement, (d) identifying new technologies, and (e) facilitating data access. Multiple strategies for designing future Science and Technology collaboration meetings are also outlined in this circular to better collect and analyze participant responses.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico,↗

USGS2023

Colorado River Basin Actionable and Strategic Integrated Science and Technology (ASIST)

Introduction The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is initiating a study approach focused on building cross-disciplinary connections to weave together the scientific knowledge related to drought conditions and effects in the Colorado River Basin. The basin is experiencing the worst drought in recorded history, posing unprecedented new challenges in the basin and in areas relying on water from the basin. Science is continually advancing, and there is an increasing need to interpret the connections between studies to predict the effects of drought and other changes affecting the Earth system. The USGS primarily works in independent disciplines and science centers to provide cutting-edge science to advance research and science applications worldwide. The complexity and volume of research that has been conducted related to drought in the Colorado River Basin is difficult to quantify. To complicate matters, studies, models, and datasets are cataloged and may be available in multiple, unrelated locations, across various internal systems, data repositories, and local offices. Furthermore, there are limited interactions and interfaces between scientists and partners working in different science disciplines; in many cases, individual science products require stakeholders to integrate complex interdisciplinary data across geographical and topical extents. The diverse array of interdisciplinary science and science products produced by the USGS highlights the need for a wide ranging collaborative support structure.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico,↗

USGS2024

Structured science syntheses to inform decision making on Federal public lands

The U.S. Geological Survey, Bureau of Land Management, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service partnered to develop a new type of science product: the structured science synthesis. Structured science syntheses are peer-reviewed reports that synthesize science information about a priority resource management issue on public lands. Structured science syntheses are developed explicitly to facilitate the application of science to decision making. Key characteristics of structured science syntheses include that they are coproduced with resource managers, developed using clear, repeatable methods and designed for ease of use. The syntheses include different types of science information needed for analyses completed under the National Environmental Policy Act.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2010

Southeast Regional Assessment Project for the National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey

The Southeastern United States spans a broad range of physiographic settings and maintains exceptionally high levels of faunal diversity. Unfortunately, many of these ecosystems are increasingly under threat due to rapid human development, and management agencies are increasingly aware of the potential effects that climate change will have on these ecosystems. Natural resource managers and conservation planners can be effective at preserving ecosystems in the face of these stressors only if they can adapt current conservation efforts to increase the overall resilience of the system. Climate change, in particular, challenges many of the basic assumptions used by conservation planners and managers. Previous conservation planning efforts identified and prioritized areas for conservation based on the current environmental conditions, such as habitat quality, and assumed that conditions in conservation lands would be largely controlled by management actions (including no action). Climate change, however, will likely alter important system drivers (temperature, precipitation, and sea-level rise) and make it difficult, if not impossible, to maintain recent historic conditions in conservation lands into the future. Climate change will also influence the future conservation potential of non-conservation lands, further complicating conservation planning. Therefore, there is a need to develop and adapt effective conservation strategies to cope with the effects of climate and landscape change on future environmental conditions. Congress recognized this important issue and authorized the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center (NCCWSC; http://nccw.usgs.gov/) in the Fiscal Year 2008. The NCCWSC will produce science that will help resource management agencies anticipate and adapt to climate change impacts to fish, wildlife, and their habitats. With the release of Secretarial Order 3289 on September 14, 2009, the mandate of the NCCWSC was expanded to address climate change-related impacts on all Department of the Interior (DOI) resources. The NCCWSC will establish a network of eight DOI Regional Climate Science Centers (RCSCs) that will work with a variety of partners to provide natural resource managers with tools and information that will help them anticipate and adapt conservation planning and design for projected climate change. The forecasting products produced by the RCSCs will aid fish, wildlife, and land managers in designing suitable adaptive management approaches for their programs. The DOI also is developing Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs) as science and conservation action partnerships at subregional scales. The USGS is working with the Southeast Region of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to develop science collaboration between the future Southeast RCSC and future LCCs. The NCCWSC Southeast Regional Assessment Project (SERAP) will begin to develop regional downscaled climate models, land cover change models, regional ecological models, regional watershed models, and other science tools. Models and data produced by SERAP will be used in a collaborative process between the USGS, the FWS (LCCs), State and federal partners, nongovernmental organizations, and academia to produce science at appropriate scales to answer resource management questions. The SERAP will produce an assessment of climate change, and impacts on land cover, ecosystems, and priority species in the region. The predictive tools developed by the SERAP project team will allow end users to better understand potential impacts of climate change and sea level rise on terrestrial and aquatic populations in the Southeastern United States. The SERAP capitalizes on the integration of five existing projects: (1) the Multi-State Conservation Grants Program project "Designing Sustainable Landscapes," (2) the USGS multidisciplinary Science Thrust project "Water Availability for Ecological Needs," (3) the USGS Southeast Pilot Project "Climate Change in the Southeastern U.S. and its Impacts on Bird Distributions and Habitats," (4) a sea-level rise impacts study envisioned jointly with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and (5) two USGS sea-level rise impact assessment projects that address inundation hazards and provide probabilistic forecasts of coastal geomorphic change. The SERAP will expand on these existing projects and include the following tasks, which were initiated in summer 2009: * Regionally downscaled probabilistic climate-change projections * Integrated coastal assessment * Integrated terrestrial assessment * Multi-resolution assessment of potential climate change effects on biological resources: aquatic and hydrologic dynamics * Optimal conservation strategies to cope with climate change The SERAP seeks to formally integrate these tasks to aid conservation planning and design so that ecosystem management decisions can be optimized for providing desirable outcomes across a range of species and environments. The following chapters detail SERAP's efforts in providing a suite of regional climate, watershed, and landscape-change analyses and develop the interdisciplinary framework required for the biological planning phases of adaptive management and strategic conservation. The planning phase will include the identification of conservation alternatives, development of predictive models and decision support tools, and development of a template to address similar challenges and goals in other regions. The project teams will explore and develop ways to link the various ecological models arising from each component. The SERAP project team also will work closely with members of the LCCs and other partnerships throughout the life of the project to ensure that the objectives of the project meet resources mangers needs in the Southeast.

Open-File Report↗