Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Earth”

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 1,531 records · Page 85Linked to original sources
USGS1996

Coastal hazards: hurricanes, tsunamis, coastal erosion

Oceans are the largest geographic feature on the surface of the Earth, covering approximately 70% of the planet's surface. As a result, oceans have a tremendous impact on the Earth, its climate, and its inhabitants. The coast or shoreline is the boundary between ocean environments and land habitats. By the year 2025, it is estimated that approximately two-thirds of the world's population will be living within 200 kilometers of a coast. In many ways, we treat the coast just like any other type of land area, as a safe and stable place to live and play. However, coastal environments are dynamic, and they constantly change in response to natural processes and to human activities.

General Information Product↗
USGS2001

Satellite images for land cover monitoring - Navigating through the maze

Policy makers, managers, scientists and the public can view the changing environment using satellite images. More than 60 Earth observing satellites are collecting images of the Earth's surface. Remote sensing satellite systems for land cover assessment are operated by a growing number of countries including India, the United States, Japan, France, Canada and Russia. The focus of this publication is satellite systems for land cover monitoring. On the reverse is a table that compares a selection of these systems, whose data are globally available in a form suitable for land cover analysis. We hope the information presented will help you assess the utility of remotely sensed image to meet your needs.

Report↗
USGS1947

Part 3: Volcano investigations on Umnak Island, 1946

Umnak Island is a dumbbell-shaped island in the eastern part of the Aleutian Islands. The island is 70 miles long and trends northeast-southwest. During 1946 volcano investigations were begun on the island and geologic mapping of most of northeastern Umnak Island was completed. Okmok Volcano, a large, broad volcanic mountain rising to altitudes of 3,000 to 3,500 feet, occupies the central portion of northeastern Umnak Island. Fort Glenn, and Army airbase, is situated on the eastern end of the island, approximately 9 miles east of Okmok Volcano. The central part of Okmok Volcano is indented by Okmok caldera, a large cliff-rimmed volcanic depression, 7%, miles in maximum diameter. The floor of the caldera is 1,500 to 2,500 feet below the caldera rim. Nine large cinder cones and many small ones lie on the caldera floor, chiefly along two arcuate zones. The caldera is drained by Crater Creek, which flows through a deep gorge cut in the northeastern wall of the caldera, and into Bering Sea. Mount Tulik (4,111 feet altitude) and Mount Idak (1,918 feet altitude) arc important centers of ancient volcanism on the flanks of Okmok Volcano. The geologic history of Okmok Volcano falls into three stages: The first includes the upbuilding of an ancient cone—Mount Okmok—to an altitude of at least 6;500 feet on the site of the present caldera; the second encompasses the destruction in a castastrophic eruption of the summit cone and the formation of the caldera; the third comprises events since the great eruption. The earliest activity at Mount Okmok probably dates hack to the late Tertiary period. A composite cone, concave-sided in profile, was built by the alternate eruption of ash, coarse pyroclastics, and basalt flows. During the late Pleistocene, volcanic activity at Mount Okmok was greatly reduced and a topography of late youth was carved on the lower slopes by streams and valley glaciers. The summit of Mount Okmok was upwarped and dikes and necks were injected into the resulting fractures. A large volcano at the site of Mount Idak was active during part of the period of upbuilding at Mount Okmok but became extinct during the middle Pleistocene. A parasitic vent, Mount Tulik, became active during the late Pleistocene and built a steep-sided cone before it became extinct, shortly before the formation of Okmok caldera. A cataclysmic eruption terminated the period of dissection at Mount Okmok, 10,000 or more years ago. Part of the summit was blown away by the explosive violence of this eruption. Nuees ardentes (glowing clouds) and mudflows deposited tuff-breccia and agglomerate in the glacial valleys; later phases of the eruption blanketed the landscape with ash. Near the end of the eruption, the remaining upper part of the volcano collapsed along arcuate fractures: large blocks subsided several thousand feet and are now concealed in the caldera Poor beneath later deposits. A large arcuate fault block which subsided less than other blocks stands above the floor in the northeastern part of the caldera. After the eruption, water collected in the caldera, forming a lake. Small but frequently active cones built islands in the lake and covered its bottom with pyroclastic debris. The lake eventually overflowed the lowest point in the rim of the caldera, and Crater Creek Gorge was carved, draining the lake and dissecting its deposits. Renewed movement along faults at the head of Crater Creek Gorge later raised a harrier which temporarily dammed the drainage and formed a second caldera lake. Readjustments among subsided blocks in the caldera floor resulted in the folding of postcaldera deposits at several localities. Much of the caldera floor has been covered by lava flows extruded from several cones since the draining of the first caldera lake. In general, however, volcanic activity seems to have declined since the great caldera-forming eruption. Seven eruptions from cones on the caldera floor have been recorded since 1817; the latest occurred in 1945. As part of the geochemical program for the study of Okmok Volcano, temperatures of fumaroles were measured and samples of the products of the volcanic activity were analyzed. Average temperatures of fumaroles at one source of the 1945 lava low dropped from 320° C. on July 19 to 90° C. on September 5. The temperatures of fumaroles associated with the crater vents on both Cones A and C ranged from 95° C. to 97" C., which is slightly below the condensation point of steam, indicating the presence of minor quantities of gases other than steam. The magmatic gases of fumaroles on Cone A consisted of carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide in about equal amounts. The lack of halogen acid gases in the fumaroles and the steadily dropping temperatures arc interpreted as indicating that the present quiescence of Cone A will continue for many months. Solid reaction products from areas of fumarolic activity on Cone A are sulfates of sodium, calcium, and iron. The presence of hydrogen sulfide as the dominant sulfur gas at Cone C is interpreted as indicating the dying stages of the present cycle of activity of Cone C. Thermal springs along the north base of Cone D have a total discharge of 115 cubic feet per second. Their average temperature is approximately 7° C. above the annual mean. From these figures it is calculated that about 21,000 kilogram calories per second are being given off by Cone D. The spring waters contain minute quantities of boron which is indicative of a magmatic source for a small part of the water. Hence, Cone D though quiescent is not extinct. Evidence is presented to show that most of the spring water from Cone D is meteoric in origin. Thermal waters in the southwestern part of Umnak Island at Hot Springs Cove and south of Geyser Bight contain lithium, boron, arsenic, and antimony in solution. These elements are regarded as derived from underlying magmas that are in an advanced state of crystallization and hence not likely to give rise in the near future to large-scale volcanic activity. Three portable seismographs were placed on the flanks of Okmok Volcano and were in operation during most of the period from June 1 to October 1. During this period several slight tremors and one moderate tremor, all of distant origin, were registered, but no tremors attributable to Okmok Volcano were recorded. The lack of tremor records, however, may have been due more to the insensitivity of the instruments than to the absence of tremors. Earth-current investigations were carried on during August and September by comparison of records obtained from a base station at Fort Glenn with those from a station 1 V2 miles southwest of Mount Tulik. The records obtained indicate that no difference in magnitude or direction of earth currents existed between the Fort Glenn and Mount Tulik areas. The similarity of record obtained is indicative of the absence of a disturbing factor such as a large body of live magma beneath Okmok Volcano. Future eruptions of Okmok Volcano are expected to he of mild to moderate intensity, and will he chiefly in the form of ash falls from vents inside the caldera. There would be a great menace—in the form of lava flows, nuees ardentes, and mudflows—to installations at Fort Glenn if a new center of volcanism came into existence on the east slope of Okmok Volcano. Small postcaldera cones now exposed there indicate that extra-caldera eruptions have occurred in the recent past and can be expected in the future. The possibility of another catastrophic eruption of the caldera-forming type, however, is remote. Okmok Volcano should be kept under close observation, partly because of its possible threat to Fort Glenn and partly because it is a readily accessible locale for accumulating information on details of volcanic processes, applicable to other volcanoes in the Aleutian arc and elsewhere.

Alaska↗
USGS1992

Global Land Information System (GLIS)

The Global Land Information System (GLIS) is an interactive computer system developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for scientists seeking sources of information about the Earth's land surfaces. GLIS contains "metadata," that is, descriptive information about data sets. Through GLIS, scientists can evaluate data sets, determine their availability, and place online requests for products. GLIS is more, however, than a mere list of products. It offers online samples of earth science data that may be ordered through the system.

General Information Product↗
USGS1982

Map projections used by the U.S. Geological Survey

After decades of using only one map projection, the Polyconic, for its mapping program, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) now uses sixteen of the more comnon map projections for its published maps. For larger scale maps, including topographic quadrangles and the State Base Map Series, conformal projections such as the Transverse Mercator and the Lambert Conformal Conic are used. On these, the shapes of small areas are shown correctly, but scale is correct only along one or two lines. Equal-area projections, especially the Albers Equal-Area Conic, and equidistant projections which have correct scale along many lines appear in the National Atlas. Other projections, such as the Miller Cylindrical and the Van der Grinten, are chosen occasionally for convenience, sometimes making use of existing base maps prepared by others. Some projections treat the Earth only as a sphere, others as either ellipsoid or sphere. The USGS has also conceived and designed several new projections, icluding the Space Oblique Mercator, the first map projection designed to permit mapping of the Earth continuously from a satellite with low distortion. The mapping of extraterrestrial bodies has resulted in the use of standard projections in completely new settings. With increased computerization, it is important to realize that rectangular coordinates for all these projections may be mathematically calculated with formulas which would have seemed too complicated in the past, but which now may be programed routinely, if clearly delineated with numerical examples. A discussion of appearance, usage, and history is given together with both forward and inverse equations for each projection involved.

Bulletin↗
USGS1987

The geologic story of Yosemite National Park

Within 150 years, Yosemite has moved from great obscurity to worldwide fame as one of the most visited of our national parks. As a remarkable place where people can enjoy unparalleled scenes of natural beauty and where many easily observed geologic features are concentrated, the park is rivaled by few other areas on the planet. The majesty and immense variety of these features have inspired artists and photographers, intrigued tourists, and stirred controversy among geologists. Field studies in the Yosemite area have contributed to the development of our ideas about geologic processes, including the different actions of streams and glaciers in the evolution of the landscape, and the formation of granite, the basic bedrock of much of the Earth's continents. The park's role as a natural laboratory for geologic research cannot be overemphasized, and its investigation has led to many landmark studies by U.S. Geological Survey geologists over the past 70 years. In 1913, the first detailed program of research on the geology of the park and the origin ofYosemite Valley was begun by Francois Matthes and Frank Calkins. Their work, along with that of later generations of Survey geologists, myself included, serves as the basis for our present understanding of the geologic history of Yosemite and of the processes that formed and continue to mold its landscape. This book, which makes available in one volume a comprehensive summary of the current geologic knowledge of Yosemite National Park, is an excellent example of the Survey's continuing effort to provide earth-science information in the public service.

California↗
USGS2007

Geology and Mineral Resources of the East Mojave National Scenic Area, San Bernardino County, California

The rocks of the East Mojave National Scenic Area (EMNSA) record a history of dynamic geologic events that span more than 1,800 million years (m.y.). These geologic events contributed significantly to development of the spectacular vistas and panoramas present in the area today. The oldest rocks underlie much of the northern part of the EMNSA. These rocks were subjected to extreme pressures and temperatures deep in the Earth's crust about 1,700 million years ago (Ma). They were subsequently intruded by granitic magmas from about 1,695 to 1,650 Ma, by additional granitic magmas at about 1,400 Ma and, later, at about 1,100 Ma, by iron-rich magmas that crystallized to form dark igneous rocks termed diabase. Unusual potassium- and magnesium-rich rocks, emplaced at about 1,400 Ma, crop out in a few places within and near the EMNSA. Their distinctive composition results from very small degrees of partial melting of mantle peridotite that was highly enriched in incompatible trace elements. At Mountain Pass, just outside the northeast boundary of the EMNSA, the potassium- and magnesium-rich rocks are accompanied by a rare type of carbonatite, an igneous rock composed of carbonate minerals, that contains high-grade rare earth element mineralization. Subsequent to these igneous-dominated events, sedimentary strata began to be deposited at about 1,000 Ma; mostly sandstone and shale were deposited initially in marine and, less commonly, in continental environments along the west edge of the core of the North American continent. Sedimentation eventually culminated in the widespread deposition of thick marine limestones from about 400 to about 245 Ma. These limestones represent a continental-shelf environment where shallow-water limestone formed to the east and deeper water limestone formed to the west. The end of the formation of these sedimentary deposits probably was caused by uplift of the shelf, which marked the beginning of a long period of tectonic upheaval. At about 170 Ma, widespread emplacement of coarse-grained granitic magmas began again in the region; some of these magmas also erupted as volcanic rocks. Additional episodes of magmatism took place at about 100 Ma and at 75 Ma. Most of the metallic-mineral occurrences in the EMNSA are associated with the igneous rocks that range in age from 170 to 75 Ma. During each of these magmatic events, the previously deposited sedimentary strata were buckled and broken as the entire region, part of a continental-scale fold and thrust belt, underwent crustal shortening and compression. A period of tectonic quiescence characterized the region from about 65 Ma to about 20 Ma. The quiet period ended abruptly with widespread volcanism along the southern and eastern parts of the EMNSA. The major gold deposits in the Castle Mountains are associated with this episode of volcanism. During this volcanic outburst, the crust extended laterally in several areas that border the EMNSA: along the lower Colorado River 65 km to the east, in the Kingston Range 20 km to the north, and in the central Mojave Desert 75 km to the southwest. This extensional deformation is characterized by the superposition of upper-crustal rocks over midcrustal rocks along large flat-lying faults, several of which project beneath rocks now exposed at the surface in the EMNSA. The near-surface rocks of the EMNSA, however, apparently escaped much of this intense extensional deformation. High-angle faults, which cut several of the mountain ranges, possibly have undergone several periods of movement, which date back to approximately 70 to 100 Ma. Some faults are of local importance to the physiographic development of the mountain ranges and intervening basins, and, in places, the faults seem to have localized various kinds of ore bodies and mineral occurrences. Volcanism and extensional deformation waned from 14 to 11 Ma. By approximately 10 Ma, widespread erosion had produced broad erosional dome-shaped mountains in the n

Bulletin↗
USGS2001

Geology and natural history of the San Francisco Bay area: A field-trip guidebook

A National Association of Geoscience Teachers Far Western Section (NAGT-FWS) field conference is an ideal forum for learning about the geology and natural history of the San Francisco Bay area. We visit classic field sites, renew old friendships, and make new ones. This collection of papers includes field guides and road logs for all of the Bay-area trips held during the NAGT-FWS 2001 Fall Field Conference and supplemental chapters on other aspects of the area’s natural and human history. The trips touch on many aspects of the geology and natural hazards of the Bay area, especially urban problems associated with living on an active tectonic plate margin: earthquake faults, coastal erosion, landslides, and the utilization of land and natural resources. We hope this conference not only provides a two-day learning opportunity for conference participants but that students and educators will use this field guidebook for future teaching and research. Many thanks are due to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and San José State University (SJSU) for cohosting the conference. We are grateful to each of the field trip leaders for preparing the trips and writing the accompanying guides. We especially appreciate the many hours put in by the guidebook reviewers, Robert I. Tilling (USGS) and Paula Messina (SJSU), and to the USGS Western Publications Group for editing, layout, and web posting. Additional guidebook contributions include articles by John Galloway, Scott Starratt, Page Mosier, and Susan Toussaint. During the conference guest speakers include Robert I. Tilling (USGS Volcano Hazards Team) and Ross Stein (USGS Earthquake Hazards Team). Workshops prepared for the conference include GIS in the classroom, using USGS data by John Vogel (USGS) and Paula Messina (SJSU), and The Best of BAESI (Bay Area Earth Science Institute), a teacher training organization under the direction of Ellen Metzger (SJSU) and Richard Sedlock (SJSU). The conference provides an opportunity to showcase USGS scientific and education resources with self-guided tours of the USGS Library, the Earth Science Information Center (ESIC), the Visitor Center, and various laboratories on the USGS campus and includes a half-day participatory tour of the USGS research vessel the R/V Polaris and the USGS Marine Facility at the Port of Redwood City under the direction of Cynthia L. Brown, Francis Parchaso, and Tara Schraga. Beyond the names mentioned above, a host of USGS and SJSU staff, SJSU students, and NAGT-FWS members contributed to the preparation and orchestration of the conference. We couldn’t have done it alone. Leslie C. Gordon (USGS), Philip W. Stoffer (USGS), and Deborah Harden (SJSU) NAGT-FWS 2001 Fall Field Conference Organizers.

California↗
USGS1993

Understanding our fragile environment; Lessons from geochemical studies

An understanding of our fragile environment can begin with a recognition of the importance of certain elements, commonly called "minerals substances" (such as iron and zinc), in the lives of humans and animals and in the soils that support plants. This recognition is well deserved because these elements are essential for the life or optimum health of an organism. Some elements such as carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, magnesium, potassium, and phosphorus are required in relatively large amounts by organisms. However, others are required in smaller quantities; these are referred to as trace elements. Diseases have been related to the deficiency of about 20 elements in animals and humans and to the deficiency of approximately 13 elements in plants. At the same time, if these and other elements occur in quantities great enough, toxicity can result. An element, or any substance, that occurs in the environment and contains concentrations above what are considered to be background levels may be considered a contaminant. When contaminants occur at levels that are potentially harmful to organisms, they are labeled as hazards. Often the quantitative difference between essential amounts and toxic concentrations of these elements is very small. For example, the trace element selenium is required at a level of no less than 0.4 ppm in the diet of cattle but can be toxic at levels greater than approximately 4ppm. Elements that are required for survival by animals and plants are termed essential, while those not required are nonessential. Trace essential elements such as fluorine, copper, selenium, molybdenum, and others listed in the table on page 1 can be hazardous to life forms if present at high levels. Nonessential heavy metals such as arsenic, lead, mercury, cadmium, and chromium are usually toxic to organisms at much lower levels than trace essential elements. Depending on the association that these nonessential elements may form with natural geologic materials such as organic matter, other elements or minerals, and adsorbers (such as clays), these elements can range from being safe to being extremely toxic. The elemental composition of plants, animals, and humans correlates with the geologic makeup of the Earth, and life has evolved reflecting these natural occurrences. The science of environmental geochemistry examines the interrelationship of life with the physical and chemical Earth.

Circular↗
USGS2000

U.S. Geological Survey coastal and marine geology research; recent highlights and achievements

The USGS Coastal and Marine Geology Program has large-scale national and regional research projects that focus on environmental quality, geologic hazards, natural resources, and information transfer. This Circular highlights recent scientific findings of the program, which play a vital role in the USGS endeavor to understand human interactions with the natural environment and to determine how the fundamental geologic processes controlling the Earth work. The scientific knowledge acquired through USGS research and monitoring is critically needed by planners, government agencies, and the public. Effective communication of the results of this research will enable the USGS Coastal and Marine Geology Program to play an integral part in assisting the Nation in responding the pressing Earth science challenges of the 21st century.

Circular↗
USGS2004

Geology of the National Capital Region: Field trip guidebook

The 2004 Joint Northeast-Southeast Section Meeting of the Geological Society of America is the fourth such meeting and the third to be held in or near Washington, D.C. This guidebook and the field trips presented herein are intended to provide meeting participants, as well as other interested readers, a means to understand and enjoy the rich geological and historical legacy of the National Capital Region. The field trips cover all of the major physiographic and geologic provinces of the central Appalachians in the Mid-Atlantic region. Trip 1 outlines the tectonic history of northern Virginia along an east-to-west transect from the Coastal Plain province to the Blue Ridge province, whereas the other field trips each focus on a specific province. From west to east, these excursions investigate the paleoclimate controls on the stratigraphy of the Paleozoic rocks of the Allegheny Plateau and Valley and Ridge province in West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Maryland (Trip 3); Eocene volcanic rocks that intrude Paleozoic rocks in the westernmost Valley and Ridge province in Virginia and West Virginia (Trip 4); age, petrology, and structure of Mesoproterozoic gneisses and granitoids located in the Blue Ridge province within and near Shenandoah National Park, Virginia (Trip 2); the use of argon data to unravel the complex structural and thermal history of the metamorphic rocks of the eastern Piedmont province in Maryland and Virginia (Trip 5); the use of cosmogenic isotopes to understand the timing of bedrock incision and formation of terraces along the Potomac River in the eastern Piedmont province near Great Falls, Virginia and Maryland (Trip 6); the nature of the boundary between rocks of the Goochland and Chopawamsic terranes in the eastern Piedmont of Virginia (Trip 7); the role of bluffs and fluvial terraces of the Coastal Plain in the Civil War Battle of Fredericksburg, Virginia (Trip 8); and the Tertiary lithology and paleontology of Coastal Plain strata around the Chesapeake Bay of Virginia and Maryland (Trip 9). Some of the field trips present new geochronological research that uses isotopic techniques to unravel Earth history and processes, including U-Pb dating to determine the timing of metamorphism and igneous activity associated with the Mesoproterozoic Grenville orogeny (Trip 2); argon (4DAr/39Ar) analysis to understand the complex Paleozoic history of deformation and metamorphism in the Piedmont (Trip 5); and cosmogenic beryllium-10 data to derive exposure ages of landforms and deposits of the Potomac River valley (Trip 6). Several trips shed insight on significant or enigmatic geologic features of the region. Trip 3 presents evidence for global paleoclimate controls on the Paleozoic stratigraphy of the Appalachian basin, including evidence for Late Devonian glacial deposits. Trip 4 investigates unusual Eocene igneous rocks in the Eastern United States, and Trip 2 visits several local ductile high-strain zones, offering geologists opportunities to consider the importance of such structures relative to the poorly understood Rockfish Valley fault zone in the Blue Ridge province. In the Piedmont province, Trip 7 focuses on a controversial terrane boundary, whereas Trip 5 crosses several lithologic belts with distinct thermotectonic histories that suggest terrane boundaries. Trip 6 sheds new light on the erosional history of a major river gorge cut into crystalline rocks in the Fall Zone. Four trips are recommended for Earth science teachers and are cosponsored by the National Association of Geologic Teachers (NAGT). These trips focus on the tectonic history of northern Virginia (Trip 1), terraces of the Potomac River at Great Falls and cosmogenic isotope analysis to date the terraces and the incision history (Trip 6), and Tertiary lithology and paleontology of the Chesapeake Bay region (Trip 9). Trip 8 takes advantage of the rich Civil War history of this region to look at the role that geology played in the strategies and outcome of the Battle of Fredericksburg. This guidebook is the result of much hard work by many individuals. The editors wish to thank the field trip leaders and authors, the technical reviewers, and Nancy Stamm of ths USGS Geologic Names Committee. We also owe a very special thanks to Linda Gundersen, Chief Scientist, Geologic Discipline, USGS, who provided funding for the guidebook.

Maryland, Virginia, Washington DC↗
USGS2005

Geography for a Changing World - A science strategy for the geographic research of the U.S. Geological Survey, 2005-2015

This report presents a science strategy for the geographic research of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the years 2005-2015. The common thread running through the vision, mission, and science goals presented in the plan is that USGS geographers will provide national leadership to understand coupled human-environmental systems in the face of land change and will deliver pertinent information to decisionmakers on the vulnerability and resilience of these systems. We define land change science as the study of the human and environment dynamics that give rise to changed land use, cover, and surface form. A number of realities shape the strategic context of this plan: The Department of Interior Strategic Plan focuses on meeting society’s resource needs and sustaining the Nation’s life support systems, underscoring the importance of characterizing and understanding coupled human-environmental systems. In redefining its mission in the mid-1990s, the USGS envisions itself as an integrated natural science and information agency. The USGS will assume a national leadership role in the use of science to develop knowledge about the web of relations that couple biophysical and human systems and translate this knowledge into unbiased, reliable information that meets important societal information needs. The following trends will influence USGS geography-oriented science activities over the next decade. Most of the emerging earth science issues that the USGS will address are geographic phenomena. A growing international concern for aligning society’s development activities with environmental limits has led to an articulation of a science agenda associated with global environmental change, vulnerability, and resilience. Earth science investigations have evolved toward the study of very large areas, and the resulting huge volumes of data are challenging to manage and understand. Finally, scientists and the public face the challenge of gaining intelligent insights about geographic and environmental processes from these data, with the ultimate goal of guiding resource-management decisions. The first four science goals in the plan support understanding the human and environmental dynamics of land change. Each science goal has an associated set of strategic actions to achieve the goal. These goals and actions are consistent with national science priorities and the Department of Interior and USGS missions, take advantage of existing expertise, and lead to the strengthening of critical geographic research capacities that do not exist in other USGS disciplines.

Circular↗
USGS2006

USGS science in Menlo Park -- a science strategy for the U.S. Geological Survey Menlo Park Science Center, 2005-2015

In the spring of 2004, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Menlo Park Center Council commissioned an interdisciplinary working group to develop a forward-looking science strategy for the USGS Menlo Park Science Center in California (hereafter also referred to as "the Center"). The Center has been the flagship research center for the USGS in the western United States for more than 50 years, and the Council recognizes that science priorities must be the primary consideration guiding critical decisions made about the future evolution of the Center. In developing this strategy, the working group consulted widely within the USGS and with external clients and collaborators, so that most stakeholders had an opportunity to influence the science goals and operational objectives. The Science Goals are to: Natural Hazards: Conduct natural-hazard research and assessments critical to effective mitigation planning, short-term forecasting, and event response. Ecosystem Change: Develop a predictive understanding of ecosystem change that advances ecosystem restoration and adaptive management. Natural Resources: Advance the understanding of natural resources in a geologic, hydrologic, economic, environmental, and global context. Modeling Earth System Processes: Increase and improve capabilities for quantitative simulation, prediction, and assessment of Earth system processes. The strategy presents seven key Operational Objectives with specific actions to achieve the scientific goals. These Operational Objectives are to: Provide a hub for technology, laboratories, and library services to support science in the Western Region. Increase advanced computing capabilities and promote sharing of these resources. Enhance the intellectual diversity, vibrancy, and capacity of the work force through improved recruitment and retention. Strengthen client and collaborative relationships in the community at an institutional level. Expand monitoring capability by increasing density, sensitivity, and efficiency and reducing costs of instruments and networks. Encourage a breadth of scientific capabilities in Menlo Park to foster interdisciplinary science. Communicate USGS science to a diverse audience.

Circular↗
USGS2008

U.S. Geological Survey activities related to American Indians and Alaska Natives: Fiscal year 2006

In the late 1800s, John Wesley Powell, the second director of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), followed his interest in the tribes of the Great Basin and Colorado Plateau and studied their cultures, languages, and surroundings. From that early time, the USGS has recognized the importance of Native knowledge and living in harmony with nature as complements to the USGS mission to better understand the Earth. Combining traditional ecological knowledge with empirical studies allows the USGS and Native American governments, organizations, and people to increase their mutual understanding and respect for this land. The USGS is the earth and natural science bureau within the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI). The USGS does not have regulatory or land management responsibilities.

Circular↗
USGS2011

Geology for a changing world 2010-2020-Implementing the U.S. Geological Survey science strategy

This report describes a science strategy for the geologic activities of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the years 2010-2020. It presents six goals with accompanying strategic actions and products that implement the science directions of USGS Circular 1309, 'Facing Tomorrow's Challenges-U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007-2017.' These six goals focus on providing the geologic underpinning needed to wisely use our natural resources, understand and mitigate hazards and environmental change, and understand the relationship between humans and the environment. The goals emphasize the critical role of the USGS in providing long-term research, monitoring, and assessments for the Nation and the world. Further, they describe measures that must be undertaken to ensure geologic expertise and knowledge for the future. The natural science issues facing today's world are complex and cut across many scientific disciplines. The Earth is a system in which atmosphere, oceans, land, and life are all connected. Rocks and soils contain the answers to important questions about the origin of energy and mineral resources, the evolution of life, climate change, natural hazards, ecosystem structures and functions, and the movements of nutrients and toxicants. The science of geology has the power to help us understand the processes that link the physical and biological world so that we can model and forecast changes in the system. Ensuring the success of this strategy will require integration of geological knowledge with the other natural sciences and extensive collaboration across USGS science centers and with partners in Federal, State, and local agencies, academia, industry, nongovernmental organizations and, most importantly, the American public. The first four goals of this report describe the scientific issues facing society in the next 10 years and the actions and products needed to respond to these issues. The final two goals focus on the expertise and infrastructure needed to ensure the long-term sustainability of the geological sciences in the USGS. The ultimate goal of USGS science and of the strategy laid out in this document is to contribute to the development of a sustainable society that operates in harmony with the Earth systems that society depends upon. As we begin the second decade of the 21st century, our Nation faces growing challenges in resource availability, climate and environmental change, and natural hazards. Meeting these challenges will require strong collaboration across the natural and social sciences and extensive partnerships with both the public and private sectors. The six goals described in this document represent a mix of scientific focus areas and operational necessities that together provide a comprehensive roadmap for USGS geologic science to effectively contribute to the USGS mission, providing science for a changing world.

Circular↗
USGS2013

U.S. Geological Survey climate and land use change science strategy—A framework for understanding and responding to global change

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), a nonregulatory Federal science agency with national scope and responsibilities, is uniquely positioned to serve the Nation’s needs in understanding and responding to global change, including changes in climate, water availability, sea level, land use and land cover, ecosystems, and global biogeochemical cycles. Global change is among the most challenging and formidable issues confronting our Nation and society. Scientists agree that global environmental changes during this century will have far-reaching societal implications (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007; U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2009). In the face of these challenges, the Nation can benefit greatly by using natural science information in decisionmaking. Since the passage of the U.S. Global Change Research Act of 1990, the USGS has made substantial scientific contributions to understanding the interactive living and nonliving components of the Earth system. USGS natural science activities have led to fundamental advances in observing and understanding climate and land-cover change and the effects these changes have on ecosystems, natural-resource availability, and societal sustainability. Most of these major advances were pursued in partnership with other organizations within and outside the Department of the Interior. The inherent value of partnerships with other U.S. Global Change Research Program agencies and natural-resource managers is emphasized in all aspects of the planning and implementation of this Science Strategy for the coming decade. Over the next 10 years, the USGS will make substantial contributions to understanding how Earth systems interact, respond to, and cause global change. The USGS will work with science partners, decisionmakers, and resource managers at local to international levels (including Native American tribes) to improve understanding of past and present change; develop relevant forecasts; and identify those lands, resources, and communities most vulnerable to global change processes. Science will play an essential role in helping communities and land and resource managers understand local to global implications, anticipate effects, prepare for changes, and reduce the risks associated with decisionmaking in a changing environment. USGS partners and stakeholders will benefit from the data, predictive models, and decision-support products and services resulting from the implementation of this strategy. This Science Strategy recognizes core USGS strengths that are applied to key societal problems. It establishes seven goals for USGS global change science and strategic actions that may be implemented in the short term (1–5 years) and the longer term (5–10 years) to improve our understanding of the following areas of inquiry: Rates, causes, and impacts of past global changes; The global carbon cycle; Biogeochemical cycles and their coupled interactions; Land-use and land-cover change rates, causes, and consequences; Droughts, floods, and water availability under changing land-use and climatic conditions; Coastal response to sea-level rise, climatic change, and human development; and Biological responses to global change. In addition to the seven thematic goals, we address the central role of monitoring in accordance with the USGS Science Strategy recommendation that global change research should rely on existing “…decades of observational data and long-term records to interpret consequences of climate variability and change to the Nation’s biological populations, ecosystems, and land and water resources” (U.S. Geological Survey, 2007, p. 19). We also briefly describe specific needs and opportunities for coordinating USGS global change science among USGS Mission Areas and address the need for a comprehensive and sustained communications strategy.

Circular↗
USGS2015

The U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Collections Management System (GCMS)—A master catalog and collections management plan for U.S. Geological Survey geologic samples and sample collections

**Updated guidance is available in USGS Instructional Memorandum CSS 2019-01 .** Abstract The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is widely recognized in the earth science community as possessing extensive collections of earth materials collected by research personnel over the course of its history. In 2006, a Geologic Collections Inventory was conducted within the USGS Geology Discipline to determine the extent and nature of its sample collections, and in 2008, a working group was convened by the USGS National Geologic and Geophysical Data Preservation Program to examine ways in which these collections could be coordinated, cataloged, and made available to researchers both inside and outside the USGS. The charge to this working group was to evaluate the proposition of creating a Geologic Collections Management System (GCMS), a centralized database that would (1) identify all existing USGS geologic collections, regardless of size, (2) create a virtual link among the collections, and (3) provide a way for scientists and other researchers to obtain access to the samples and data in which they are interested. Additionally, the group was instructed to develop criteria for evaluating current collections and to establish an operating plan and set of standard practices for handling, identifying, and managing future sample collections. Policies and procedures promoted by the GCMS would be based on extant best practices established by the National Science Foundation and the Smithsonian Institution. The resulting report—USGS Circular 1410, “The U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Collections Management System (GCMS): A Master Catalog and Collections Management Plan for U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Samples and Sample Collections”—has been developed for sample repositories to be a guide to establishing common practices in the collection, retention, and disposal of geologic research materials throughout the USGS. While constructing this report, the GCMS’s potential customers and their needs were considered. Two critical definitions have been clarified: a repository is a facility for the long-term management of geologic collections, and a collection is a set of specimens that have been brought together on the basis of some common characteristic. Required sample metadata for newly collected samples, as well as for older collections, were also stipulated and are listed and explained in this report. Several basic policies are also recommended by the GCMS in order to standardize operations among the physical repositories where collections are currently housed. The GCMS Collection Management Plan provides a set of protocols and templates for the management of scientific collections, including access, storage, transfer, and disposal of physical geologic samples and data. This plan is flexible to allow each repository to adapt the practices best suited to its collections. The general consideration for implementation of the GCMS is that all active USGS geologic sample repositories will form the core of GCMS and that participating science centers will develop procedures based on proposed GCMS methodologies. The GCMS is a collective resource for the entire USGS community and the users who discover the geologic materials kept in these repositories and seek to access them.

Circular↗
USGS2016

Developing integrated methods to address complex resource and environmental issues

Introduction This circular provides an overview of selected activities that were conducted within the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Integrated Methods Development Project, an interdisciplinary project designed to develop new tools and conduct innovative research requiring integration of geologic, geophysical, geochemical, and remote-sensing expertise. The project was supported by the USGS Mineral Resources Program, and its products and acquired capabilities have broad applications to missions throughout the USGS and beyond. In addressing challenges associated with understanding the location, quantity, and quality of mineral resources, and in investigating the potential environmental consequences of resource development, a number of field and laboratory capabilities and interpretative methodologies evolved from the project that have applications to traditional resource studies as well as to studies related to ecosystem health, human health, disaster and hazard assessment, and planetary science. New or improved tools and research findings developed within the project have been applied to other projects and activities. Specifically, geophysical equipment and techniques have been applied to a variety of traditional and nontraditional mineral- and energy-resource studies, military applications, environmental investigations, and applied research activities that involve climate change, mapping techniques, and monitoring capabilities. Diverse applied geochemistry activities provide a process-level understanding of the mobility, chemical speciation, and bioavailability of elements, particularly metals and metalloids, in a variety of environmental settings. Imaging spectroscopy capabilities maintained and developed within the project have been applied to traditional resource studies as well as to studies related to ecosystem health, human health, disaster assessment, and planetary science. Brief descriptions of capabilities and laboratory facilities and summaries of some applications of project products and research findings are included in this circular. The work helped support the USGS mission to “provide reliable scientific information to describe and understand the Earth; minimize loss of life and property from natural disasters; manage water, biological, energy, and mineral resources; and enhance and protect our quality of life.” Activities within the project include the following: Spanned scales from microscopic to planetary; Demonstrated broad applications across disciplines; Included life-cycle studies of mineral resources; Incorporated specialized areas of expertise in applied geochemistry including mineralogy, hydrogeology, analytical chemistry, aqueous geochemistry, biogeochemistry, microbiology, aquatic toxicology, and public health; and Incorporated specialized areas of expertise in geophysics including magnetics, gravity, radiometrics, electromagnetics, seismic, ground-penetrating radar, borehole radar, and imaging spectroscopy. This circular consists of eight sections that contain summaries of various activities under the project. The eight sections are listed below: Laboratory Facilities and Capabilities, which includes brief descriptions of the various types of laboratories and capabilities used for the project; Method and Software Development, which includes summaries of remote-sensing, geophysical, and mineralogical methods developed or enhanced by the project; Instrument Development, which includes descriptions of geophysical instruments developed under the project; Minerals, Energy, and Climate, which includes summaries of research that applies to mineral or energy resources, environmental processes and monitoring, and carbon sequestration by earth materials; Element Cycling, Toxicity, and Health, which includes summaries of several process-oriented geochemical and biogeochemical studies and health-related research activities; Hydrogeology and Water Quality, which includes descriptions of innovative geophysical, remote-sensing, and geochemical research pertaining to hydrogeology and water-quality applications; Hazards and Disaster Assessment, which includes summaries of research and method development that were applied to natural hazards, human-caused hazards, and disaster assessments; and Databases and Framework Studies, which includes descriptions of fundamental applications of geophysical studies and of the importance of archived data.

Circular↗