Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Water Resources Technical Report”

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 163 records · Page 9Linked to original sources
USGS2013

Integrating Federal and State data records to report progress in establishing agricultural conservation practices on Chesapeake Bay farms

In response to the Executive Order for Chesapeake Bay Protection and Restoration (E.O. #13508, May 12, 2009), the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) took on the task of acquiring and assessing agricultural conservation practice data records for U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) programs, and transferred those datasets in aggregated format to State jurisdictional agencies for use in reporting conservation progress to the Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership (CBP Partnership). Under the guidelines and regulations that have been developed to protect and restore water-quality in the Chesapeake Bay, the six State jurisdictions that fall within the Chesapeake Bay watershed are required to report their progress in promoting agricultural conservation practices to the CBP Partnership on an annual basis. The installation and adoption of agricultural best management practices is supported by technical and financial assistance from both Federal and State conservation programs. The farm enrollment data for USDA conservation programs are confidential, but agencies can obtain access to the privacy-protected data if they are established as USDA Conservation Cooperators. The datasets can also be released to the public if they are first aggregated to protect farmer privacy. In 2012, the USGS used its Conservation Cooperator status to obtain implementation data for conservation programs sponsored by the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and the USDA Farm Service Agency (FSA) for farms within the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Three jurisdictions (Delaware, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia) used the USGS-provided aggregated dataset to report conservation progress in 2012, whereas the remaining three jurisdictions (Maryland, New York, and Virginia) used jurisdictional Conservation Cooperator Agreements to obtain privacy-protected data directly from the USDA. This report reviews the status of conservation data sharing between the USDA and the various jurisdictions, discusses the methods that were used by the USGS in 2012 to collect and process USDA agricultural conservation data, and also documents methods that were used by the jurisdictions to integrate Federal and State data records, reduce double counting, and provide an accurate reporting of conservation practices to the CBP Partnership’s Annual Progress Review. A similar tracking, reporting, and assessment will occur in future years, as State and Federal governments and nongovernmental organizations continue to work with farmers and conservation districts to reduce the impacts of agriculture on water-quality.

Delaware; Maryland; New York; Pennsylvania;Virgini↗
USGS2013

U.S. Geological Survey science for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative: 2011 annual report

This is the fourth report produced by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative (WLCI) to detail annual work activities. In FY2011, there were 37 ongoing, completed, or new projects conducted under the five major multi-disciplinary science and technical-assistance activities: (1) Baseline Synthesis, (2) Targeted Monitoring and Research, (3) Data and Information Management, (4) Integration and Coordination, and (5) Decisionmaking and Evaluation. The four new work activities were (1) development of the Western Energy Citation Clearinghouse, a Web-based energy-resource database of references for literature and on-line resources focused on energy development and its effects on natural resources; (2) a study to support the Sublette County Conservation District in ascertaining potential water-quality impacts to the New Fork River from energy development in the Pinedale Anticline Project Area; (3) a study to test the efficacy of blending high-frequency temporal data provided by Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) sensors and high-resolution Landsat data for providing the fine-resolution data required to evaluate habitat responses to management activities at the landscape level; and (4) a study to examine the seasonal water chemistry of Muddy Creek, including documenting salinity patterns and providing a baseline for assessing potential effects of energy and other development on water quality in the Muddy Creek watershed. Two work activities were completed in FY2011: (1) the assessment of rancher perceptions of energy development in Southwest Wyoming and (2) mapping aspen stands and conifer encroachment using classification and regression tree (CART) analysis for effectiveness monitoring. The USGS continued to compile data, develop geospatial products, and upgrade Web-based products in support of both individual and overall WLCI efforts, including (1) ranking and prioritizing proposed conservation projects, (2) developing the WLCI integrated assessment, (3) developing the WLCI 5-year Conservation Action Plan, and (4) continuing to upgrade the content and improve the functionality of the WLCI Web site. For the WLCI FY2012 annual report, a decision was made to greatly reduce the overall length of the annual report, which will be accomplished by simplifying the report format and focusing on the take-home messages of each work activity for WLCI partners.

Wyoming↗
USGS2025

Assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources in the Haynesville Formation within the onshore United States and State waters of the Gulf Coast Basin, 2024

Using a geology-based assessment methodology, the U.S. Geological Survey estimated undiscovered, technically recoverable mean resources of 152 million barrels of oil and 47.9 trillion cubic feet of gas in reservoirs of the Haynesville Formation within the onshore United States and State waters of the Gulf Coast Basin.

Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi↗
USGS2009

USGS Capabilities to Study the Impacts of Drought and Climate Change in the Southeastern United States

In the Southeast, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists are researching issues through technical studies of water availability and quality, geologic processes (marine, coastal, and terrestrial), geographic complexity, and biological resources. The USGS is prepared to tackle multifaceted questions associated with global climate change and resulting weather patterns such as drought through expert scientific skill, innovative research approaches, and accurate information technology.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2019

Managing effects of drought and other water resource challenges in Alaska and the Pacific Northwest

This is a Cooperator Report. As such, there is no specific abstract. The physical, ecological, and social environments of Alaska and the Pacific Northwest (PNW) region of the United States are extremely diverse. Alaska ranges from the Arctic Ocean and the very cold, dry environments of the North Slope to the cool and very rainy coastal North Pacific region of Southeast Alaska. Most precipitation falls as snow at higher elevations. In Arctic Alaska, average annual temperature is 14.6 F, and average annual precipitation is 11 inches. By contrast, in Southeast Alaska, average annual temperature is 35.8 F, and annual average precipitation is 143 inches. The PNW, defined here as Idaho, Oregon, and Washington, ranges from the Pacific Coast (annual precipitation of 200 inches) to interior semi-arid regions (annual precipitation of 8 inches). Precipitation patterns in the PNW are strongly governed by orographic phenomena, with high, persistent snowpack in the higher mountains (e.g., record annual snowfall of 1,130 in at Mount Baker, Washington in 1999-2000). Ecosystems in the PNW include productive temperate coniferous forests near the Pacific coast and along the (wet) west slope of the Cascade Range, less productive mixed-conifer forest along the (dry) east slope of the Cascades and in interior mountain ranges, and sagebrush-steppe and shrublands at lower elevations in much of the interior and mountain valleys. Large rivers and thousands of smaller tributaries form an extensive network of riparian, wetland, and estuarine systems that provide both critical hydrologic function and biological diversity at broad and fine spatial scales. Although Alaska and the Pacific Northwest differ in important physical, ecological, and social features, the importance of natural resources is evident in both regions. Water is important for wildlife and people. Water provides critical habitat for salmon, which are culturally and economically valuable species. Timber production has declined in recent decades. Recreation has emerged as a major revenue source.

Alaska, Oregon, Washington↗
USGS2019

Evaluation of groundwater-flow models for estimating drawdown from proposed groundwater development in Tule Desert, Nevada

At the request of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is releasing with this open-file report (OFR) a previously unpublished review and comparison of two numerical models for Tule Desert, Nevada. The original review was performed in spring 2013, and only minor editorial revisions were made in the current (2019) OFR for clarity and to reformat the original interagency correspondence to the USGS OFR template. No revisions have been made to the technical content of the original review for this OFR release. Report content presented in the purpose and scope statement, and all subsequent sections of the OFR, are original content submitted to BLM in May 2013. Model review and comparisons described in the following paragraphs are based on, in part, results of a long-term (more than 2 years) aquifer test mandated by Nevada State Engineer Order 1169. Additional information on Order 1169 and associated aquifer test results can be found at the State of Nevada Division of Water Resources website (State of Nevada, 2019).

Nevada↗
USGS1976

Ground-water resources of the White River Junction area, Vermont

A study of the ground-water resources of the White River Junction area, Windsor County, Vermont, was begun in 1969 as part of a cooperative program between the Vermont Department of Water Resources and the U.S. Geological Survey. The purpose of the study was to provide technical appraisal of potential sources of water to meet the expanded needs of many towns in Windsor County, as pointed out by the Rural Comprehensive Water and Sewer Plan (Vermont Department of Water Resources, 1969). Funding was made available by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farmers Home Administration, for water-resources exploration, including the testing of the quantity and quality of the water in sand and gravel aquifers. The geology was mapped, and private and municipal water supplies were inventoried in 1969.

Vermont↗
USGS2017

Assessment of water and proppant quantities associated with petroleum production from the Bakken and Three Forks Formations, Williston Basin Province, Montana and North Dakota, 2016

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has completed an assessment of water and proppant requirements and water production associated with the possible future production of undiscovered oil and gas resources in the Three Forks and Bakken Formations (Late Devonian to Early Mississippian) of the Williston Basin Province in Montana and North Dakota. This water and proppant assessment is directly linked to the geology-based assessment of the undiscovered, technically recoverable continuous oil and gas resources that is described in USGS Fact Sheet 2013–3013.

Montana, North Dakota↗
USGS1996

Simulation of subsurface storage and recovery of treated effluent injected in a saline aquifer, St. Petersburg, Florida

The potential for subsurface storage and recovery of treated effluent into the uppermost producing zone (zone A) of the Upper Floridan aquifer in St. Petersburg, Florida, is being studied by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the city of St. Petersburg and the Southwest Florida Water Management District. A measure of the success of this practice is the recovery efficiency, or the quantity of water relative to the quantity injected, that can be recovered before the water that is withdrawn fails to meet water-quality standards. The feasibility of this practice will depend upon the ability of the injected zone to receive, store, and discharge the injected fluid. A cylindrical model of ground-water flow and solute transport, incorporating available data on aquifer properties and water quality, was developed to determine the relation of recovery efficiency to various aquifer and fluid properties that could prevail in the study area. The reference case for testing was a base model considered representative of the saline aquifer underlying St. Petersburg. Parameter variations in the tests represent possible variations in aquifer conditions in the area. The model also was used to study the effect of various cyclic injection and withdrawal schemes on the recovery efficiency of the well and aquifer system. A base simulation assuming 15 days of injection of effluent at a rate of 1.0 million gallons per day and 15 days of withdrawal at a rate of 1.0 million gallons per day was used as reference to compare changes in various hydraulic and chemical parameters on recovery efficiency. A recovery efficiency of 20 percent was estimated for the base simulation. For practical ranges of hydraulic and fluid properties that could prevail in the study area, the model analysis indicates that (1) the greater the density contrast between injected and resident formation water, the lower the recovery efficiency, (2) recovery efficiency decreases significantly as dispersion increases, (3) high formation permeability favors low recovery efficiencies, and (4) porosity and anisotropy have little effect on recovery efficiencies. In several hypothetical tests, the recovery efficiency fluctuated between about 4 and 76 percent. The sensitivity of recovery efficiency to variations in the rate and duration of injection (0.25, 0.50, 1.0, and 2.0 million gallons per day) and withdrawal cycles (60, 180, and 365 days) was determined. For a given operational scheme, recovery efficiency increased as the injection and withdrawal rate is increased. Model results indicate that recovery efficiencies of between about 23 and 37 percent can be obtained for different subsurface storage and recovery schemes. Five successive injection, storage, and recovery cycles can increase the recovery efficiency to about 46 to 62 percent. There is a larger rate of increase at smaller rates than at larger rates. Over the range of variables studied, recovery efficiency improved with successive cycles, increasing rapidly during initial cycles tyhen more slowly at later cycles. The operation of a single well used for subsurface storage and recovery appears to be technically feasible under moderately favorable conditions; however, the recovery efficiency is higly dependent upon local physical and operational parameters. A combination of hydraulic, chemical, and operational parameters that minimize dispersion and buoyancy flow, maximizes recovery efficiency. Recovery efficiency was optimal where resident formation water density and permeabilities were relatively similar and low.

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗
USGS2007

Mapping and vessel-based capabilities

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists from the Florida Integrated Science Center (FISC) conduct scientific investigations of submerged coastal and marine resources using new and existing technologies. Each contributing technique, method, or product adds to our understanding of coastal and marine resources and provides information for resource-management decisionmaking. In support of this mission, the USGS St. Petersburg office maintains a fleet of research vessels used for inland, coastal, and open-water marine surveys and investigations. Each vessel has advantages and limitations related to water depth, carrying capacity, speed, operation in open water, and other functions. These research platforms are staffed by experienced technical and scientific professionals with expertise in marine navigation, geology, geophysics, engineering, biology, and oceanography.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2011

Changes in water levels and storage in the High Plains Aquifer, predevelopment to 2009

The High Plains aquifer underlies 111.8 million acres (175,000 square miles) in parts of eight States - Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming. The area overlying the High Plains aquifer is one of the primary agricultural regions in the Nation. Water-level declines began in parts of the High Plains aquifer soon after the onset of substantial irrigation with groundwater from the aquifer (about 1950 and termed "predevelopment" in this fact sheet). By 1980, water levels in the High Plains aquifer in parts of Texas, Oklahoma, and southwestern Kansas had declined more than 100 feet (ft) (Luckey and others, 1981). In 1987, in response to declining water levels, Congress directed the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in collaboration with numerous Federal, State, and local water-resources entities, to assess and track water-level changes in the aquifer. This fact sheet summarizes changes in water levels and drainable water in storage in the High Plains aquifer from predevelopment to 2009. Drainable water in storage is the fraction of water in the aquifer that will drain by gravity and can be withdrawn by wells. The remaining water in the aquifer is held to the aquifer material by capillary forces and generally cannot be withdrawn by wells. Drainable water in storage is termed "water in storage" in this report. A companion USGS report presents more detailed and technical information about water-level and storage changes in the High Plains aquifer during this period (McGuire, 2011).

Colorado;Kansas;Nebraska;New Mexico;Oklahoma;South↗
USGS1976

Ground-water resources of the Barre-Montpelier area, Vermont

A study of the ground-water resources of the Barre - Montpelier area (fig. 1), Washington County, was begun in 1968 as part of a cooperative program between the Vermont Department of Water Resources and the U.S. Geological Survey. The purpose of the study is to provide technical appraisal of potential sources of water to meet the expanded needs of most towns in Washington County, as pointed out by the Rural Comprehensive Water and Sewer Plan (Vermont Department Water Resources, 1969). Funding was made available by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farmers Home Administration, for water-resources exploration, including the testing of the quantity and quality of the water in sand and gravel aquifers. The geology of the area was mapped, and private and municipal water supplies were inventoried in 1968.

Vermont↗
USGS2011

U.S. Geological Survey Science for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative-2010 Annual Report

This is the third report produced by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative (WLCI) to detail annual work activities. The first report described activities for 2007 and 2008, and the second report covered work activities for FY09. This third report covers work activities conducted in FY2010, and it continues the 2009 approach of reporting on all the individual activities to help give WLCI partners and other readers the full scope of what has been accomplished. New in this year's report is an additional section for each work activity that outlines the work planned for the following fiscal year. In FY2010, there were 35 ongoing/expanded, completed, or new projects conducted under the five major multi-disciplinary science and technical-assistance activities: (1) Baseline Synthesis; (2) Targeted Monitoring and Research; (3) Data and Information Management; (4) Integration and Coordination; and (5) Decisionmaking and Evaluation. The three new work activities were to (1) compile existing water data for the entire WLCI region and (2) develop regional curves (statistical models) for relating bankfull-channel geometry and discharge to drainages in the WLCI region, both of which will help guide long-term monitoring of water resources; and (3) initiate a groundwater-monitoring network to evaluate potential effects of energy-development activities on groundwater quality where groundwater is an important source of public/private water supplies. Results of the FY2009 work to develop methods for assessing soil organic matter and mercury indicated that selenium and arsenic levels may be elevated in the Muddy Creek Basin; thus, the focus of that activity was shifted in FY2010 to evaluate biogeochemical cycling of elements in the basin. In FY2010, two ongoing activities were expanded with the addition of more sampling plots: (a) the study of how greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) use vegetation-treatment areas (sites added to the Moxa Arch Natural Gas Development area) and (2) the study of cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) occurrence in burn treatments of the Little Mountain Ecosystem. The activity that entails evaluating relationships between ungulate herbivory and fire on aspen (Populus tremuloides) recruitment also was expanded to include relationships between stand characteristics of and herbivory on aspen in various ecohydrological settings. The USGS continued compiling data and developing geospatial products from all of its WLCI activities to support (1) ranking and prioritizing of proposed conservation projects, (2) developing the WLCI Integrated Assessment, and (3) developing the WLCI 5-year Conservation Action Plan. Two activities were completed in FY2010: (1) the conceptual modeling and indicator selection for monitoring resource conditions across the WLCI region, and (2) the literature review on effects of oil and gas development in western regions of the United States, both of which are in the last stages of publication.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1972

Reconnaissance of chemical quality of surface water and fluvial sediment in the Price River Basin, Utah

This report on the quality of surface water in the Price River basin was prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Rights. The primary purpose of the reconnaissance on which this report is based was to obtain information about (1) the general chemical characteristics of surface water throughout the basin, (2) the effect of the natural environment and of present water use on these chemical characteristics, and (3) general characteristics of the sediment discharge of selected streams in the basin. A secondary objective was the definition of specific problem areas or reaches in which marked deterioration in water quality was evident.

Utah↗
USGS1996

A guide to safe field operations

Most functions of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Water Resources Division (WRD) require employees to participate in numerous field activities ranging from routine meetings with cooperators, other federal and public officials, and private citizens to potentially hazardous assignments, such as making flood measurements and scuba diving to service underwater instruments. It is paramount that each employee be aware of safety procedures and operational policies of the WRD to ensure that (1) their activities avoid or minimize personal injury to the employee, coworkers, or anyone in the vicinity of the field activity, and (2) their conduct does not infringe on the personal or property rights of any individual or organization. The purpose of the guide is to familiarize employees with the operational and safety procedures expected to be followed by each employee as a representative of the WRD. It is also intended as a training tool for all new employees and a document to be reviewed by each employee before undertaking a field assignment. It includes general procedures that are standard and applicable to all field operations, such as communication, vehicle operation, and adequate preparation for anticipated weather conditions. It also includes a discussion of specific procedures and safety considerations for most of the routine field assignments undertaken by hydrologists and hydrologic technicians of the WRD. The guide is not intended to be a technical handbook outlining step-by-step procedures for performing specific tasks or a comprehensive discussion of every possible activity that may be undertaken by a USGS employee. Employees are referred to the Techniques for Water-Resources Investigations (TWRI) series for specific technical procedures and to the U.S. Geological Survey Safety and Environmental Health Handbook 445-1-H (USGS, August 1989), USGS Occupational Hazards and Safety Procedures Handbook 445-2-H (December 1993), the WRD notebook on Safety Policy and Guidance Memoranda, and other references for procedures and safety issues related to nonroutine activities, such as operations on large vessels and aircraft.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1989

Water-resources investigations in Tennessee: Programs and activities of the U.S. Geological Survey, 1988-1989

he following report is the most current in a series of reports published by the Water Resources Division of the US. Geological Survey describing the ongoing water-resources programs and activities in the Tennessee District. These reports provide general information about the projects conducted by the Tennessee District in cooperation with state, local, and other federal agencies. In addition to describing the principal objectives of each program and project, information about the progress of each investigation is provided. The variety of projects conducted by the Tennessee District’s staff normally results in significant new findings. Each year the focus of the programs conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey in Tennessee varies in response to local, state, and federal interests. The local and state interests are addressed through our cooperative investigations program, in which the U.S. Geological Survey provides as much as 50 percent of the funds to conduct investigations. Almost two thirds of the projects in the District are in the cooperative program; the U.S. Geological Survey contributed almost 1.5 million dollars in matching funds to cooperative programs in Tennessee in fiscal year 1989. Federal funds from within the U.S. Geological Survey and other federal agencies financed additional programs at a cost of about 1 million dollars. Technical focus of local and federal programs has shifted during the last few years towards issues addressing hazardous-wastes and ground-water contamination. Many of the projects presented in this report address those issues. Emerging issues such as concerns about wetlands, scour of bridges, quality of storm-water runoff, and droughts, are well represented in the scope of the investigations described in this report. The results of these programs provide significant input to many other activities of the State of Tennessee and the Federal Government that have a direct impact on the quality of life. The information and conclusions obtained from these data-collection programs and investigations are crucial to meet many of the water-supply needs, regulatory, and other water-related issues that the local, state, and federal governments must address. The ability of the U.S. Geological Survey to provide the data to meet these needs resides with the support that the program receives by the State and Federal cooperators. I am pleased with the extent and degree of cooperation that the program receives across the State and from other federal agencies. This report is a testimony to this support. I wish to share these achievements with the dedicated employees of the Tennessee District as well as with the cooperating agencies and their representatives that make this program feasible.

Tennessee↗