Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “National Wildlife”

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

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 1,459 records · Page 81Linked to original sources
USGS2009

Genetic conservation and paddlefish propagation

The conservation of genetic diversity of our natural resources is overwhelmingly one of the central foci of 21st century management practices. Three recommendations related to the conservation of paddlefish Polyodon spathula genetic diversity are to (1) identify genetic diversity at both nuclear and mitochondrial DNA loci using a suggested list of 20 sampling locations, (2) use genetic diversity estimates to develop genetic management units, and (3) identify broodstock sources to minimize effects of supplemental stocking on the genetic integrity of native paddlefish populations. We review previous genetic work on paddlefish and described key principles and concepts associated with maintaining genetic diversity within and among paddlefish populations and also present a genetic case study of current paddlefish propagation at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Gavins Point National Fish Hatchery. This study confirmed that three potential sources of broodfish were genetically indistinguishable at the loci examined, allowing the management agencies cooperating on this program flexibility in sampling gametes. This study also showed significant bias in the hatchery occurred in terms of male reproductive contribution, which resulted in a shift in the genetic diversity of progeny compared to the broodfish. This shift was shown to result from differential male contributions, partially attributed to the mode of egg fertilization. Genetic insights enable implementation of a paddlefish propagation program within an adaptive management strategy that conserves inherent genetic diversity while achieving demographic goals.

American Fisheries Society Symposium↗
USGS2021

Navigating the science-policy interface

As a wildlife population ecologist who wants to conduct useful science, I find the Endangered Species Act (ESA), like other federal wildlife statutes, an intriguing read. The topic is in my wheelhouse—fish, wildlife, and plants, with a focus at the population and species levels. There is an emphasis on science, in fact, the “best scientific and commercial data available.” And there are intriguing questions: what threats does a species face? What habitat would be critical for its survival? Could any federal actions put the species or critical habitat in greater peril? I am not alone in this attraction. Hundreds of scientists continue to consider the types of scientific analysis suggested by the ESA. The enthusiasm is palpable. If the first cursory read of the ESA is intriguing to me as a scientist, the second close read is tantalizing—I realize that something very attractive is just out of reach. I know how to estimate the probability of extinction, but I do not know what “in danger of extinction” means. I know how to evaluate the incremental change in status that might arise from some level of proposed take, but I do not know what “is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence” of a species means. The standards expressed in the statute are not stated in purely scientific terms. Thus, ESA decisions cannot be based solely on science, and require additional policy interpretation. Clarity about these policy interpretations—even awareness that they are needed—can be hard to find, leaving a gap between what I can provide as a scientist and what an ESA decision maker needs. This awareness of the interaction between science and policy is also occurring in the larger field of conservation science, where there has been an increasing recognition of a research-implementation gap, the need for actionable science, and the promise of translational ecology. All of these terms emphasize that science alone does not result in action; instead, action arises out of decisions that are informed both by science and by values. At the interface of science and policy, a scientist can deliver relevant knowledge, and a decision maker can explain the policy context in which that science is needed. As a scientist wanting to conduct useful science, I crave this two-way conversation. But how can this conversation be structured in a meaningful and appropriate way? In this chapter, I explore how decision analysis can be used to navigate the science-policy interface for ESA decisions. Decision analysis is a large, well-established field that studies how decisions are made and how they could be made, with explicit attention given to clarifying and separating the values-based and science-based elements of a decision; identifying the impediments that make a decision difficult; and providing tools to overcome those impediments. There have been concerted efforts to apply formal decision analysis to ESA decisions, but the practice is not yet widespread across both the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service (the Services). The chapter begins with an introduction to decision analysis and how it seeks to bridge the science-policy interface. In subsequent sections, I explore how a decision analyst might frame listing and reclassification decisions, recovery planning, section 7 consultation, budget allocations, and a few other ESA decisions, with an emphasis on two questions: for each type of decision, what policy clarifications does the decision maker need to make; and knowing the policy context, what type of scientific assessment is needed. In the final discussion, I identify common themes among the types of decisions, and offer thoughts on how decision analysis could be more widely used to integrate science into ESA decisions.

Book chapter↗
USGS2026

Using monitoring data to understand lake water quality trends in southwest Alaskan National Parks

Lakes are vital ecosystems in southwest Alaska, supporting Pacific salmon, wildlife, and people. In Katmai and Lake Clark National Parks and Preserves, lakes span diverse landscapes containing volcanic uplands, glacier-fed valleys, and tundra all of which combine to influence their temperature, water quality, and ability to support critical uses. As the regional climate shifts, our understanding of lake responses requires more than just measurements of the lake surface water. Through long-term sampling of lakes from the surface to deep waters, we track how the environment —shaped by weather, geology, and land cover—governs lake water quality, including temperature, dissolved oxygen, specific conductance, pH, and turbidity. These data help us understand and predict how lake water quality will change across seasons and landscapes, and what this will mean for lake ecology and the habitats fish and wildlife depend on. This work builds a foundation for predicting how Alaska’s lakes are changing and what that means for the ecosystems and communities they support.

Alaska↗
USGS2012

Lateral and vertical channel movement and potential for bed-material movement on the Madison River downstream from Earthquake Lake, Montana

The 1959 Hebgen Lake earthquake caused a massive landslide (Madison Slide) that dammed the Madison River and formed Earthquake Lake. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers excavated a spillway through the Madison Slide to permit outflow from Earthquake Lake. In June 1970, high streamflows on the Madison River severely eroded the spillway channel and damaged the roadway embankment along U.S. Highway 287 downstream from the Madison Slide. Investigations undertaken following the 1970 flood events concluded that substantial erosion through and downstream from the spillway could be expected for streamflows greater than 3,500 cubic feet per second (ft 3 /s). Accordingly, the owners of Hebgen Dam, upstream from Earthquake Lake, have tried to manage releases from Hebgen Lake to prevent streamflows from exceeding 3,500 ft 3 /s measured at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) gaging station 0638800 Madison River at Kirby Ranch, near Cameron, Montana. Management of flow releases from Hebgen Lake to avoid exceeding the threshold streamflow at USGS gaging station 06038800 is difficult, and has been questioned for two reasons. First, no road damage was reported downstream from the Earthquake Lake outlet in 1993, 1996, and 1997 when streamflows exceeded the 3,500-ft 3 /s threshold. Second, the 3,500-ft 3 /s threshold generally precludes releases of higher flows that could be beneficial to the blue-ribbon trout fishery downstream in the Madison River. In response to concerns about minimizing streamflow downstream from Earthquake Lake and the possible armoring of the spillway, the USGS, in cooperation with the Madison River Fisheries Technical Advisory Committee (MADTAC; Bureau of Land Management; Montana Department of Environmental Quality; Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks; PPL-Montana; U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service - Gallatin National Forest; and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service), conducted a study to determine movement of the Madison River channel downstream from Earthquake Lake and to investigate the potential for bed material movement along the same reach. The purpose of this report is to present information about the lateral and vertical movement of the Madison River from 1970 to 2006 for a 1-mile reach downstream from Earthquake Lake and for Raynolds Pass Bridge, and to provide an analysis of the potential for bed-material movement so that MADTAC can evaluate the applicability of the previously determined threshold streamflow for initiation of damaging erosion. As part of this study channel cross sections originally surveyed by the USGS in 1971 were resurveyed in 2006. Incremental channel-movement distances were determined by comparing the stream centerlines from 14 aerial photographs taken between 1970 and 2006. Depths of channel incision and aggregation were determined by comparing the 2006 and 1971 cross-section and water-surface data. Particle sizes of bed and bank materials were measured in 2006 and 2008 using the pebble-count method and sieve analyses. A one-dimensional hydraulic-flow model (HEC-RAS) was used to calculate mean boundary-shear stresses for various streamflows; these calculated boundary-shear stresses were compared to calculated critical-shear stresses for the bed materials to determine the potential for bed-material movement. A comparison of lateral channel movement distances with annual peak streamflows shows that streamflows higher than the 3,500-ft 3 /s threshold were followed by lateral channel movement except from 1991 to 1992 and possibly from 1996 to 1997. However, it was not possible to discern whether the channel moved gradually or suddenly, or in response to one peak flow, to several peak flows, or to sustained flows. The channel moved between 2002 and 2005 even when streamflows were less than the threshold streamflow of 3,500 ft 3 /s. Comparisons of cross sections and aerial photographs show that the channel has moved laterally and incised and aggraded to varying degrees. The channel has developed meander bends and has incised as much as 5–12 feet (ft) through the upstream part of the Madison Slide (cross sections 1400–800). Near cross section 800, the stream has eroded into the steep right bank between the stream and the road where fill was mechanically placed after 1970. Channel movement also was noted downstream from the Madison Slide. Near Raynolds Pass Bridge, about 3 miles (mi) downstream from Earthquake Lake, elevations across the channel have changed by -1.4 ft to +1.9 ft, but these changes were local in nature and could represent a few rocks or depressions in the bed. Overall, it does not appear that the materials eroded from the Madison Slide are causing aggradation in the subreach near the Raynolds Pass Bridge. Comparisons of critical shear stresses to mean boundary-shear stresses indicate that the D50 particle sizes (median size) along the right side of the bed between cross sections 400 and 500 and along the right side of the bed between cross sections 1300 and 1400 could move at the threshold streamflow. In contrast, most of the D84 particle sizes at those two locations probably will not move at the threshold streamflow. This lack of movement for the larger particles at the threshold streamflow could lead to further armoring of the bed as the D50 and smaller-sized particles are removed from the bed and transported downstream. The Shields parameter values from 0.04 to 0.08 that were used to calculate critical shear stresses could be conservative for a high-gradient stream such as the Madison. A higher, less conservative, Shields parameter would result in higher critical shear stresses, meaning that higher streamflows would be required to move material than those reported herein. In addition, because materials in the channel thalweg are exposed to higher boundary-shear stresses than the materials along the sides of the channel, larger, more erosion-resistant materials likely exist in the deeper parts of the channel where high-flow depths and velocities prevented sediment sampling. Movement of these materials might require higher critical shear stresses than estimated in this report. Characterization of sediment sizes in the center of the stream and observation of bed-material movement for a range of streamflows could provide information to help refine the Shields parameter and critical-shear stress estimates for bed materials in the Madison River downstream from Earthquake Lake. Furthermore, resurveying cross sections and water-surface elevations more frequently (either annually or after high streamflows) could better define the relation between streamflow and lateral and vertical channel movement.

Montana↗
USGS2000

Managers' summary - Ecological studies of the Pryor Mountain Wild Horse Range, 1992-1997

Ecological Studies of the Pryor Mountain Wild Horse Range, 1992-1997 provides a synthesis of key findings of landscape-scale, interdisciplinary studies of the effects of wild horses and native ungulates on a rugged, mountain ecosystem. This is perhaps the most comprehensive study of a wild horse herd conducted. This was a complex study and one involving a truly interagency approach. Six agencies either provided input to research priority setting, funding, or both. The agencies included the Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, U.S. Geological Survey, Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Wyoming Game and Fish Department, and U.S. Forest Service. The major research direction and effort came from the U.S. Geological Survey and Natural Resources Ecology Lab, Colorado State University with Montana State University and the University of Kentucky also participating. Ungulate monitoring was conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division, Bureau of Land Management, Billings Field Office and the Montana Fish and Wildlife Parks, with funding by Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area. Many other individuals and groups were involved and deserve credit. The report printing was made possible with funds from the Bureau of Land Management, Wild Horse and Burro Program, Washington Office. This report was prepared by the Information Management Project, Midcontinent Ecological Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey.

Montana, Wyoming↗
USGS2021

Spring types and contributing aquifers from water-chemistry and multivariate statistical analyses for seeps and springs in Theodore Roosevelt National Park, North Dakota, 2018

Water resources in Theodore Roosevelt National Park, North Dakota, support wildlife, visitors, and staff, and play a vital role in supporting the native ecology of the park. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the National Park Service, completed field work in 2018 for a study to address concerns about water availability and possible sources of groundwater contamination for seeps and springs in Theodore Roosevelt National Park. The objective of the study was to improve hydrologic knowledge and determine the water composition of 11 seeps and springs in the park by collecting water-chemistry data at springs, streams, wells, and rain collectors. Water samples were collected at 26 sites at springs, streams, wells, and rain collectors in the North and South Units of Theodore Roosevelt National Park. Samples in the North Unit were collected at 5 springs, 1 stream, 2 wells, and 1 rain collector. Samples in the South Unit were collected at 6 springs, 2 streams, 8 wells, and 1 rain collector. Samples from springs, streams, and wells were collected in May, July, and September 2018. Samples from rain collectors were collected when enough daily precipitation accumulated in the collectors. Sampled precipitation events during the study period were in May, June, July, August, and September 2018. Physical properties of sampled water—temperature, pH, and specific conductance—were measured in the field. Water samples were analyzed for stable isotopes of oxygen and hydrogen and for chloride concentration. Recharge rates for aquifers supplying springs were determined using precipitation volume and chloride concentrations for a 12-day period before the sample-collection date. Multivariate statistical analysis methods used on water-chemistry data included principal component analysis, cluster analysis, and end-member mixing analysis. Water composition was used to determine the spring type and contributing aquifers for 11 springs in the North and South Units of Theodore Roosevelt National Park from analyses of water-chemistry data between May and September 2018. In the North Unit, Achenbach Spring was classified as a filtration spring with water from an unconfined part of the upper Fort Union aquifer and infiltration of precipitation. Hagen Spring, Mandal Spring, and Stevens Spring were classified as contact springs supplied by semiconfined parts of the upper Fort Union aquifer. Overlook Spring at one time may have been a natural spring or seep but now is a developed spring that behaves like a flowing artesian well completed in a confined part of the upper Fort Union aquifer. In the South Unit, six springs were classified into two spring types: filtration and contact springs. Boicourt Spring and Sheep Butte Spring were classified as filtration springs that have water supplied by unconfined parts of the upper Fort Union aquifer and infiltrated precipitation. Big Plateau Spring, Lone Tree Spring, Sheep Pasture Spring, and Southeast Corner Spring were classified as contact springs that receive waters from a semiconfined part of the upper Fort Union aquifer.

North Dakota↗
USGS1995

Oil, biological communities and contingency planning

The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 mandates the inclusion of a fish and wildlife response plan in the National Contingency Plan (NCP) and the creation of Area Committees that must develop an Area Contingency Plan (ACP). Area Contingency Plans must include a detailed annex containing a Fish and Wildlife and Sensitive Environments Plan. Tank vessels, offshore facilities, and certain onshore facilities must have response plans consistent with the requirements of the NCP and the ACP. New regulations to supersede the Type A and B procedures of the Natural Resources Damage Assessment Regulations are being developed for oil spills. Currently, four assessment methods have been proposed: (1) Type A, (2) comprehensive (Type B), (3) intermediate (between types A and B), and (4) compensation tables. The Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund is approaching its ceiling of $1 billion, but only $50 million has been appropriated. Effective biological contingency planning requires extensive knowledge of (1) the environmental fate of petroleum, (2) the effects of petroleum on organisms, (3) the existing biological resources, and (4) the establishment of a system of biological priorities. The characteristics and fate of petroleum and the biological effects of petroleum are reviewed. Assessment of biological resources includes plant and animal distributions, important habitat, endangered or threatened species, and economic considerations. The establishment by Area Committees of priorities for environmental protection, injury assessment, and restoration will promote efficient spill response. Three special issues are discussed: (1) improving our ability to restore natural resources, (2) the potential role of biological diversity in spill response planning, and (3) planning for animal rehabilitation.

Book chapter↗
USGS2018

Assessment of capacity-building activities for forest measurement, reporting, and verification, 2011–15

This report was written as a collaborative effort between the U.S. Geological Survey, SilvaCarbon, and Wageningen University with funding provided by the U.S. Agency for International Development and the European Space Agency, respectively, to address a pressing need for enhanced result-based monitoring and evaluation of delivered capacity-building activities. For this report, the capacity-building activities delivered by capacity-building providers (referred to as “providers” hereafter) during 2011–15 (the study period) to support countries in building measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV) systems for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) were assessed and evaluated. Summarizing capacity-building activities and outcomes across multiple providers was challenging. Many of the providers did not have information readily available, which precluded them from participating in this study despite the usefulness of their information. This issue led to a key proposed future action: Capacity-building providers could establish a central repository within the Global Forestry Observation Initiative (GFOI; http://www.gfoi.org/ ) where data from past, current, and future activities of all capacity-building providers could be stored. The repository could be maintained in a manner to continually learn from previous lessons. Although various providers monitored and evaluated the success of their capacity-building activities, such evaluations only assessed the success of immediate outcomes and not the overarching outcomes and impacts of activities implemented by multiple providers. Good monitoring and evaluation should continuously monitor and periodically evaluate all factors affecting the outcomes of a provided capacity-building activity. The absence of a methodology to produce quantitative evidence of a causal link between multiple capacity-building activities delivered and successful outcomes left only a plausible association. A previous publication argued that plausible association, although not a precise measurement of cause and effect, was a realistic tool. Our review of the available literature on this subject did not find another similar assessment to assess capacity-building activities for supporting the countries in building MRV system for REDD+. Four countries from the main forested regions of Africa, the Americas, and Asia were chosen as subjects for this report based on the length of time SilvaCarbon and other providers have provided capacity-building activities toward MRV system for REDD+: Colombia (the Americas), the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC; Africa), Peru (the Americas), and the Republic of the Philippines (referred to as “the Philippines” hereafter; Asia). Several providers were contacted for information to include in this report, but, because of various constraints, only SilvaCarbon, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) participated in this study. These three providers supported various targeted capacity-building activities through-out Africa, the Americas, and Asia, including the following: technical workshops at national and regional levels (referred to as “workshops” hereafter), hands on training, study tours, technical details by experts, technical consultation between providers and recipients, sponsorship for travel, organizing network meetings, developing sampling protocols, assessing deforestation and degradation drivers, estimating carbon stock and flow, designing monitoring systems for multiple uses, promoting public-private partnerships to scale up investments on MRV system for REDD+, and assisting with the design of national forest monitoring systems. Their activities were planned in coordination with key partners in each country and region and with the support and assistance of other providers. Note that several other organizations and institutions assisted the providers to deliver capacity-building activities, including Boston University, Conservation International, Stanford University, University of Maryland, and Wageningen University & Research.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2025

Evaluating mountain goat population structure in Glacier National Park and Waterton Lakes National Park

Mountain goats are an iconic, climate-sensitive species across their North American alpine range. Among its nearly complete complement of native wildlife, no single species embodies Glacier National Park (GNP) more than the mountain goat. They play an important role as an alpine food source for many of the park’s carnivores including wolverines, mountain lions, and grizzly bears. Mountain goats face many increasing threats, particularly at the southern extent of their range. These include changes in precipitation and temperature, shifts in forage and fire frequency and intensity, and rapidly increasing visitation and recreation. Although the high latitude and elevations of GNP offer refugia, the mountain goat population likely declined between 2008 and 2019 and may also have a smaller distribution. In Montana, many other native mountain goat populations are also declining or have disappeared entirely. Using a combination of staff and citizen scientists, we collected fecal pellets across GNP in Montana, USA, and adjoining Waterton Lakes National Park (WLNP) in Alberta, Canada, between 2019 and 2023. We used genotypes of 6 to 19 loci microsatellites to identify individuals and assess isolation by distance, genetic structure, and genetic diversity. We found no evidence of genetic structure and only limited isolation by distance. This suggests that mountain goats in GNP and WLNP can be considered a single population, so samples can be combined across the area to estimate a single population size. Genetic diversity was similar to recent mountain goat studies conducted in other regions; allelic richness was 3.54 and inbreeding coefficients ( F IS ) ranged from 0.01–0.19, with values >0.11 only in the Livingston Range in the northwest of the study area. The high F IS in the Livingston Range suggests several closely related groups with little interchange, and perhaps a recent decrease in gene flow, both of which are consistent with a recent population decline in that area. We detected a high number of closely related individuals throughout our study area, consistent with the high adult survival, low reproductive success life history of goats, but also suggesting that we sampled much of the overall population.

Alberta, Montana↗
USGS2016

Salamander chytrid fungus ( Batrachochytrium salamandrivorans ) in the United States—Developing research, monitoring, and management strategies

The recently (2013) identified pathogenic chytrid fungus, Batrachochytrium salamandrivoran s ( Bsal ), poses a severe threat to the distribution and abundance of salamanders within the United States and Europe. Development of a response strategy for the potential, and likely, invasion of Bsal into the United States is crucial to protect global salamander biodiversity. A formal working group, led by Amphibian Research and Monitoring Initiative (ARMI) scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Fort Collins Science Center, and Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center, was held at the USGS Powell Center for Analysis and Synthesis in Fort Collins, Colorado, United States from June 23 to June 25, 2015, to identify crucial Bsal research and monitoring needs that could inform conservation and management strategies for salamanders in the United States. Key findings of the workshop included the following: (1) the introduction of Bsal into the United States is highly probable, if not inevitable, thus requiring development of immediate short-term and long-term intervention strategies to prevent Bsal establishment and biodiversity decline; (2) management actions targeted towards pathogen containment may be ineffective in reducing the long-term spread of Bsal throughout the United States; and (3) early detection of Bsal through surveillance at key amphibian import locations, among high-risk wild populations, and through analysis of archived samples is necessary for developing management responses. Top research priorities during the preinvasion stage included the following: (1) deployment of qualified diagnostic methods for Bsal and establishment of standardized laboratory practices, (2) assessment of susceptibility for amphibian hosts (including anurans), and (3) development and evaluation of short- and long-term pathogen intervention and management strategies. Several outcomes were achieved during the workshop, including development of an organizational structure with working groups for a Bsal Task Force, creation of an initial influence diagram to aid in identifying effective management actions in the face of uncertainty, and production of a list of potential management actions and key research uncertainties. Additional products under development include a Bsal Strategic Action plan, an emergency response plan, a monitoring and surveillance program, a standardized diagnostic approach, decision models for natural resource agencies, and a reporting database for salamander mortalities. This workshop was the first international meeting to address the threat of Bsal to salamander populations in the United States, with more than 30 participants from U.S. conservation and resource management agencies (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. National Park Service, and Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies) and academic research institutions in Australia, the Netherlands, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2014

Site-characteristic and hydrologic data for selected wells and springs on Federal land in Clark County, Nevada

Site-characteristic and hydrologic data for selected wells and springs on U.S. Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Forest Service land in Clark County, Nevada, were updated in the U.S. Geological Survey’s National Water Information System (NWIS) to facilitate multi-agency research. Data were researched and reviewed, sites were visited, and NWIS data were updated for 231 wells and 198 springs, including 36 wells and 67 springs that were added to NWIS and 44 duplicate sites that were deleted. The site-characteristic and hydrologic data collected, reviewed, edited, and added to NWIS include locations, well water levels, spring discharges, and water chemistry. Site-characteristic and hydrologic data can be accessed from links to the NWIS web interface; data not available through the web interface are presented in appendixes to this report.

Nevada↗
USGS2014

Connecting the dots: a collaborative USGS-NPS effort to expand the utility of monitoring data

The Natural Resource Challenge (National Park Service 1999) was a call to action. It constituted a mandate for monitoring based on the twin premises that (1) natural resources in national parks require active management and stewardship if we are to protect them from gradual degradation, and (2) we cannot protect what we do not understand. The intent of the challenge was embodied in its original description: We must expand existing inventory programs and develop efficient ways to monitor the vital signs of natural systems. We must enlist others in the scientific community to help, and also facilitate their inquiry. Managers must have and apply this information to preserve our natural resources. In this article, we report on ongoing collaborative work between the National Park Service (NPS) and the US Geological Survey (USGS) that seeks to add to our scientific understanding of the ecological processes operating behind vital signs monitoring data. The ultimate goal of this work is to provide insights that can facilitate an understanding of the systems and identify potential opportunities for active stewardship by NPS managers (Bennetts et al. 2007; Mitchell et al. 2014). The bulk of the work thus far has involved Acadia and Rocky Mountain national parks, but there are plans for extending the work to additional parks. Our story stats with work designed to consider ways of assessing the status and condition of natural resources and the potential for historical or ongoing influences of human activities. In the 1990s, the concept of "biotic integrity" began to take hold as an aspiration for developing quantitative indices describing how closely the conditions at a site resemble those found at pristine, unimpacted sites. Quantitative methods for developing indices of biotic integrity (IBIs) and elaborations of that idea (e.g., ecological integrity) have received considerable attention and application of these methods to natural resources has become widespread (Karr 1991; Barbour et al. 1999; Stoddard et al. 2008). Despite widespread use, many questions remain about how metrics are combined to form effective indices and about how to interpret both. Scientists and natural resource specialists within NPS and USGS have joined forces to critique the current analysis methods, with the collaboration involving the Rocky Mountain and Northeast Temperate NPS Inventory and Monitoring (I & M) networks, along with others, and USGS scientists from the National Wetlands Research Center and Patuxent Wildlife Research Center. Funding that initiated the project was from a joint-partnership fund managed by the USGS Ecosystems Program for National Park Monitoring research and the work was focused at Acadia National Park and Rocky Mountain National Park. Here we present synopses of two major issues addressed by the group.

The George Wright Forum↗
USGS2015

Management of conservation reserve program grasslands to meet wildlife habitat objectives

Numerous studies document environmental and social benefits of the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). This report offers a synopsis of findings regarding effects of establishing CRP conservation practices on the quality and distribution of wildlife habitat in agricultural landscapes. On individual farms, year-round provision of wildlife habitat by the CRP may appear relatively insignificant. However, considered from multi-farm to National scales, such improvements in habitat and wildlife response have proven to be extensive and profound. Because CRP acres historically have been dominated by plantings of introduced and native grasses, this report focuses on issues pertaining to wildlife response to grass-dominated conservation practices. While the majority of CRP acres have been concentrated largely in the Great Plains and Corn Belt regions, 47 states (and Puerto Rico) have participated, resulting in measurable environmental benefits throughout the United States. Numerous investigations of habitat use by a wide range of wildlife species reveal that periodic management of CRP lands can enhance benefits through and beyond a typical 10 year general CRP contract. Over its 28-year existence, the CRP has evolved into an effective integration of conservation and agricultural policies targeting fragile and environmentally-valuable lands. Landowners with fields enrolled in the CRP often are the first to observe improvement in the landscape, greater numbers and kinds of wildlife, cleaner water and air, less erosion, and they have the satisfaction of seeing fragile lands serve better purposes. There is persistent concern that improvement seen in wildlife habitat and other environmental profits delivered by the CRP are ephemeral and last only as long as funding supports the existence of the program and its vegetative cover is properly managed. An involved American population will continue to expect governmental policies to enhance long-term protection of natural resources and public health. Recent investigations furnish evidence that the collective economic value of environmental benefits delivered by the CRP likely exceed program costs. The mounting significance placed on environmentally-responsible land management is based in part on public recognition that social, aesthetic, and recreational values enhance the traditional uses of agricultural land.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS1986

The Breeding Bird Survey: Its first fifteen years, 1965-1979

The Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) is an ongoing cooperative program sponsored jointly by the U.S. Fish and Wildife Service and the Canadian Wildlife Service. Its main purpose is to estimate population trends of the many species of birds that nest in North America north of Mexico and that migrate across international boundaries. This survey provides information, both locally by ecological or political regions and on a continental scale, on (1) short-term population changes that can be correlated with specific weather incidents, (2) recovery periods following catastrophic declines, (3) normal year-to-year variations, (4) long-term population trends, and (5) invasions of exotics. The BBS also permits detailed computer mapping of relative abundance of each species, either year by year to show changes in distribution and relative abundance, or the average over a period of years. It provides base-line data with which more intensive local studies can be compared. For biogeographic studies it provides uniform sampling of bird populations by major physiographic regions across the continent. In conjunction with the Audubon Christmas Bird Count, it permits comparison of summer and winter distribution of species that winter in the United States. Most species of North American birds migrate across international boundaries, especially those shared with Canada, Mexico, and the Soviet Union. As part of our responsibility under treaties with these nations, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has developed the BBS to monitor avian population changes so that any adverse trends can be detected early. This provides the opportunity to determine the reasons for any increase or decrease, to define geographic areas in which changes are greatest, to study correlations between avian population changes and land-use changes, and to make recommendations for controlling undesirable bird population trends. For example, the BBS can be used to detect and estimate the extent of losses resulting from widespread use of pesticides, and to reveal whether major population changes of a given species (e.g., Dickcissel) in certain States are related to a continental decline or are merely a result of population shifts within the breeding range. Effects of urban and suburban expansion are often reflected in the loss of forest interior birds. Population trends for 230 species as well as several avian genera and families are discussed and graphed in this report. For most of these species, regional and well as continental trends are shown. The three major regions discussed are the Eastern, Central, and Western, bounded by the Mississippi River and the eastern base of the Rocky Mountains. Additional graphs for certain States or physiographic regions are included for selected species of special interest. The following paragraphs summarize general trends in the major bird families. The native herons in general are maintaining their populations, whereas the exotic Cattle Egret continues its geographic spread and its steady increase. Waterfowl as a group are stable or increasing. Although most widespread species of hawks are on the increase, the rarer species show evidence of decline. Among the gallinaceous birds, the greatest change was a sharp drop in Northern Bobwhite as a result of the exceptionally cold winters of 1976-77 and 1977-78 in the Ohio Valley and the Middle Atlantic States. Killdeer populations, except for a minor decline during these two winters, showed strong increases except in the West. American Woodcock were poorly sampled by the BBS because they were relatively inactive during daylight. Common Snipe and the other common shorebirds that nest in the United States and southern Canada exhibited stable or increasing populations, especially in the Eastern and Central regions. Herring Gull counts varied dramatically and irregularly from year to year. Laughing Gulls increased along the Atlantic coast and Franklin's Gulls declined in the interior of the continen

Resource Publication↗
USGS2002

Population dynamics of tule elk at point Reyes National Seashore, California

The presence of locally abundant wildlife raises questions about natural regulation and ecological consequences of overpopulation. We sought to establish precise information about population size, structure, and productivity to examine the role of natural regulation in a closed tule elk ( Cervus elaphus nannodes ) population at Point Reyes National Seashore, California, USA. We estimated an instantaneous exponential growth rate of 0.19 with an adjusted R 2 = 0.98 during 1998, 20 years after the elk were introduced. We estimated annual survival for adult cows of nearly 0.95. Calf survival from birth through the rut ending during October-November was 0.85. Male calves exhibited higher mortality than female calves. Cow mortality was associated with the calving season. We measured a 42% increase in cow:calf density from 0.733 ha -1 to 1.043 ha -1 during 1996-1998. We observed a density-correlated reduction in the rate of increase and in the cow:call ratios prior to high precipitation El Niño Southern Oscillation years, 1993, 1996, and 1997, precipitation >1.23 m year -1 . Given the high population growth rate and model evaluation of management scenarios, park managers will need to use a suite of approaches, such as contraception and removal, to maintain the elk population at levels at or near the closed-range carrying capacity for years between El Niño events.

California↗
USGS1981

Geologic map of the Beaver Creek Wilderness, McCreary County, Kentucky

The Beaver Creek Wilderness comprises approximately 4,800 acres and is principally within the cliffline bordering the Beaver Creek drainage basin in McCreary County, southeastern Kentucky. It is part of the Beaver Creek Cooperative Wildlife management Area in the Daniel Boone National Forest, which is managed by the U.S. Forest Service and the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources. The wilderness is about 11 mi southeast of Burnside, Ky., and is accessible from thr north and south via U.S. Route 27 and Forest Service Road 50, at its northwest border (fig. 1). From the east the area can be reached via State Route 90 and Forest Service Road 46, at the eastern end of the wilderness. The interiors is accessible by foot along an abandoned Forest Service road and by several primitive trails that extend along the major streams. The Beaver Creek Wilderness is centrally located at the western edge of the Appalachian coal regions and is within the highly dissected Cumberland Plateau section of the Appalachian Plateaus physiographic province (fig. 2). It is drained by Beaver Creek and tributaries, which flow northeastward into Cumberland Lake, a reservoir on the Cumberland River about 1 mi north of the wilderness. Altitudes range from about 730 ft on the lower part of Beaver Creek to about 1,200 ft at its headwaters.

Kentucky↗
USGS2006

History of the Fort Collins Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey

The U.S. Geological Survey’s Fort Collins Science Center ("the Center") has been a nucleus of research, technology development, and associated scientific activities within the Department of the Interior for more than 30 years. The Center’s historical activities are deeply rooted in federal biological resources research and its supporting disciplines, particularly as they relate to the needs of the U.S. Department of the Interior and its resource management agencies. The organizational framework and activities of the Center have changed and adapted over the years in response to shifts in the scientific issues and challenges facing the U.S. Department of the Interior and with the development of new strategies to meet these challenges. Thus, the history of the Center has been dynamic. The Center has been nested within the U.S. Geological Survey since 1996. From 1993 to 1996 the Center was a major unit of the National Biological Service (named the National Biological Survey at its inception). This was a period of great organizational flux. During that time the Center comprised multiple field stations and science functions that prior to 1993 had been scattered among the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the National Park Service, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In 1993, certain biological research components of these agencies were assigned to join with the National Ecology Research Center, formerly one of the major research and development hubs of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This was the year when biological resources research in the U.S. Department of the Interior was consolidated by the Secretary of the Interior, who in an April 1993 memo explaining his intentions wrote, "Our Department has, without doubt, the best biologists in the world." Soon after formation of the new agency, the Center was re-named the Midcontinent Ecological Science Center, reflecting its geographic location within the new Midcontinent administrative region of the National Biological Service (the other three original administrative regions were the eastern, western, and southern). The change in name to the Fort Collins Science Center took place in 2002, soon after the center moved to new facilities on the Colorado State University Natural Resources Research Campus. At various times during the period when it was part of the National Biological Service (1993–96), the Center served as the administrative and programmatic home base for a wide number of science activities in numerous Western states (table 1). This reflected the previous fragmentation of biological and related science efforts across resource management agencies in the U.S. Department of the Interior. The organization of the 2 Center within the National Biological Service was a manifestation of the desire of the Secretary of the Interior to consolidate its biological science activities in administratively independent entities that would ensure that the science retained its objectivity. Congress later recognized the need to maintain a hierarchical independence between biological science and resource management in the Department. However, Congress also saw that the U.S. Geological Survey, with its long history of objective science support to the nation in geology, water resources, geography, and remote sensing, was a suitable alternative home for these biological science functions. Thus, in 1996 Congress transferred the biological resources functions of the National Biological Service to the U.S. Geological Survey. Detailed overviews and opinions about the history and policy issues surrounding the formation and subsequent fate of the National Biological Service can be found elsewhere (for example Cohn, 1993, 2005; Kaufman, 1993; Kreeger, 1994; Pulliam, 1995, 1998a,b; Reichhardt, 1994; Wagner, 1999)

Open-File Report↗