SEARCH · Geology Reports
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.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Understanding the ecology, condition, and changes of coastal areas requires data from many sources. Broad-scale and long-term ecological questions, such as global climate change, biodiversity, and cumulative impacts of human activities, must be addressed with databases that integrate data from several different research and monitoring programs. Various barriers, including widely differing data formats, codes, directories, systems, and metadata used by individual programs, make such integration troublesome. Coastal data partnerships, by helping overcome technical, social, and organizational barriers, can lead to a better understanding of environmental issues, and may enable better management decisions. Characteristics of successful data partnerships include a common need for shared data, strong collaborative leadership, committed partners willing to invest in the partnership, and clear agreements on data standards and data policy. Emerging data and metadata standards that become widely accepted are crucial. New information technology is making it easier to exchange and integrate data. Data partnerships allow us to create broader databases than would be possible for any one organization to create by itself.
Shared, trusted, timely data are essential elements for the cooperation needed to optimize economic, ecologic, and public safety concerns related to water. The Open Water Data Initiative (OWDI) will provide a fully scalable platform that can support a wide variety of data from many diverse providers. Many of these will be larger, well-established, and trusted agencies with a history of providing well-documented, standardized, and archive-ready products. However, some potential partners may be smaller, distributed, and relatively unknown or untested as data providers. The data these partners will provide are valuable and can be used to fill in many data gaps, but can also be variable in quality or supplied in nonstandardized formats. They may also reflect the smaller partners' variable budgets and missions, be intermittent, or of unknown provenance. A challenge for the OWDI will be to convey the quality and the contextual “fitness” of data from providers other than the most trusted brands. This article reviews past and current methods for documenting data quality. Three case studies are provided that describe processes and pathways for effective data-sharing and publication initiatives. They also illustrate how partners may work together to find a metadata reporting threshold that encourages participation while maintaining high data integrity. And lastly, potential governance is proposed that may assist smaller partners with short- and long-term participation in the OWDI.
An inventory of more than 1,600 world phosphate mines, deposits, and occurrences was compiled from smaller data sets collected as part of multiple research efforts by Carlotta Chernoff, University of Arizona, and Greta Orris, U.S. Geological Survey. These data have been utilized during studies of black shale depositional environments and to construct phosphate deposit models. The compiled data have been edited for consistency and additional location information has been added where possible. The database of compiled phosphate information is being released in two sections; the geologic data in one section and the location and mineral economic data in the second. This report, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 02–156–A, contains the geologic data and is best used with the complimentary data contained in Open-File Report 02–156–B. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 02–156–B contains commodity data, location and analytical data, a variety of mineral economic data, reference information, and pointers to related records in the U.S. Geological Survey National mineral databases—MASMILS and MRDS.
As a result of the Great Lakes Charter (signed by Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Ontario, Pennsylvania, Quebec, and Wisconsin), the Geological Survey worked with a committee of the Council of Great Lakes Governors to document the water use data collection programs in the Basin. These programs are described for public water supply; supplies for domestic, irrigation, agricultural, commercial, industrial, and mining uses; and supplies for powerplants. Frequency of collection, trigger levels, storage methods, and legislative framework are described. A regional water use data base was designed to store withdrawal, diversion, and consumptive use data on a drainage basin basis. The data base will be used to decide the advisability of proposed water diversion and consumptive use projects as part of a water management strategy. Data base formats, requirements, and methods of data transmittal from each area are described. Methods for acquiring missing data are suggested. The data base will be housed by the Great Lakes Commission, Ann Arbor, Michigan. (USGS)
In 1996, at the request of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania, a team of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists produced a strategic plan for the acquisition, improvement and modernization of multidisciplinary sets of data to support the growth of the Mauritanian minerals sector and to highlight the geological and mineral exploration potential of the country. In 1999, the Ministry of Petroleum, Energy, and Mines of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania implemented a program for the acquisition of the recommended basic geoscientific information, termed the first Projet de Renforcement Institutionnel du Secteur Minier (Project for Institutional Capacity Building in the Mining Sector, PRISM-I). As a result of the PRISM-I efforts, a great deal of new geological, geophysical, geochemical, remote sensing, and hydrological data became available for evaluation and synthesis. However, the Ministry of Petroleum, Energy, and Mines recognized that additional work was required to extract the full benefit of the data before it could be of greatest use to the international community and of benefit to the Mauritanian minerals and development sector. To achieve this benefit, the Ministry of Petroleum, Energy, and Mines implemented a second Projet de Renforcement Institutionnel du Secteur Minier (PRISM-II) in 2006 to consolidate, synthesize, and interpret all of the existing data, create a new 1:1,000,000 scale geologic map, and define the mineral resource potential of the country. A consortium in which the USGS was the lead scientific agency carried out the majority of the PRISM-II work. In 2008, the USGS Mauritania Minerals Project was interrupted due to political changes in Mauritania. PRISM-II work resumed in 2011, and was completed in 2013 with the delivery of over 40 separate written reports and plates, an access file containing the Mauritanian National Mineral Deposits Database, and an interactive GIS containing all of the multi-disciplinary data and interpretive areas of mineral resource potential in Mauritania. This report contains the USGS results of the PRISM-II Mauritania Minerals Project and is presented in cooperation with the Ministry of Petroleum, Energy, and Mines of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania. The Report is composed of separate chapters consisting of multidisciplinary interpretive reports with accompanying plates on the geology, structure, geochronology, geophysics, hydrogeology, geochemistry, remote sensing (Landsat TM and ASTER), and SRTM and ASTER digital elevation models of Mauritania. The syntheses of these multidisciplinary data formed the basis for additional chapters containing interpretive reports on 12 different commodities and deposit types known to occur in Mauritania, accompanied by countrywide mineral resource potential maps of each commodity/deposit type. The commodities and deposit types represented include: (1) Ni, Cu, PGE, and Cr deposits hosted in ultramafic rocks; (2) orogenic, Carlin-like, and epithermal gold deposits; (3) polymetallic Pb-Zn-Cu vein deposits; (4) sediment-hosted Pb-Zn-Ag deposits of the SEDEX and Mississippi Valley-type; (5) sediment-hosted copper deposits; ( 6) volcanogenic massive sulfide deposits; (7) iron oxide copper-gold deposits; (8) uranium deposits; (9) Algoma-, Superior-, and oolitic-type iron deposits; (10) shoreline Ti-Zr placer deposits; (11) incompatible element deposits hosted in pegmatites, alkaline rocks, and carbonatites, and; (12) industrial mineral deposits. Additional chapters include the Mauritanian National Mineral Deposits Database are accompanied by an explanatory text and the Mauritania Minerals Project GIS that contains all of the interpretive layers created by USGS scientists. Raw data not in the public domain may be obtained from the Ministry of Petroleum, Energy, and Mines in Nouakchott, Mauritania.
Water resources data for the 2002 water year for Georgia consists of records of stage, discharge, and water quality of streams; and the stage and contents of lakes and reservoirs published in two volumes in a digital format on a CD-ROM. Volume one of this report contains water resources data for Georgia collected during water year 2002, including: discharge records of 154 gaging stations; stage for 165 gaging stations; precipitation for 105 gaging stations; information for 20 lakes and reservoirs; continuous water-quality records for 27 stations; the annual peak stage and annual peak discharge for 72 crest-stage partial-record stations; and miscellaneous streamflow measurements at 50 stations, and miscellaneous water-quality data recorded by the NAWQA program in Georgia. Volume two of this report contains water resources data for Georgia collected during calendar year 2002, including continuous water-level records of 155 ground-water wells and periodic records at 132 water-quality stations. These data represent that part of the National Water Data System collected by the U.S. Geological Survey and cooperating State and Federal agencies in Georgia.
Water resources data for the 2002 water year for Georgia consists of records of stage, discharge, and water quality of streams; and the stage and contents of lakes and reservoirs published in two volumes in a digital format on a CD-ROM. Volume one of this report contains water resources data for Georgia collected during water year 2002, including: discharge records of 154 gaging stations; stage for 165 gaging stations; precipitation for 105 gaging stations; information for 20 lakes and reservoirs; continuous water-quality records for 27 stations; the annual peak stage and annual peak discharge for 72 crest-stage partial-record stations; and miscellaneous streamflow measurements at 50 stations, and miscellaneous water-quality data recorded by the NAWQA program in Georgia. Volume two of this report contains water resources data for Georgia collected during calendar year 2002, including continuous water-level records of 155 ground-water wells and periodic records at 132 water-quality stations. These data represent that part of the National Water Data System collected by the U.S. Geological Survey and cooperating State and Federal agencies in Georgia.
Throughout its history, the United States has made major investments in assessing natural resources, such as soils, timber, oil and gas, and water. These investments allow policy makers, the private sector and the American public to make informed decisions about cultivating, harvesting or conserving these resources to maximize their value for public welfare, environmental conservation and the economy. As policy issues evolve, new priorities and challenges arise for natural resource assessment, and new approaches to monitoring are needed. For example, informed conservation and use of the nation’s finite fresh water resources in the context of increasingly intensive land development is a priority for today’s policy decisionmakers. There is a need to evaluate whether today’s water monitoring programs are generating the information needed to answer questions surrounding these new policy priorities. The Northeast-Midwest Institute (NEMWI), in cooperation with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program, initiated this project to explore the types and amounts of water data needed to address water-quality related policy questions of critical concern to today’s policy makers. The collaborating entities identified two urgent water policy questions and conducted case studies in the Northeast-Midwest region to determine the water data needed, water data available, and the best ways to fill the data gaps relative to those questions. This report details the output from one case study and focuses on the Lake Erie drainage basin, a data-rich area expected to be a best-case scenario in terms of water data availability.
The movement of animals is strongly influenced by external factors in their surrounding environment such as weather, habitat types, and human land use. With advances in positioning and sensor technologies, it is now possible to capture animal locations at high spatial and temporal granularities. Likewise, scientists have an increasing access to large volumes of environmental data. Environmental data are heterogeneous in source and format, and are usually obtained at different spatiotemporal scales than movement data. Indeed, there remain scientific and technical challenges in developing linkages between the growing collections of animal movement data and the large repositories of heterogeneous remote sensing observations, as well as in the developments of new statistical and computational methods for the analysis of movement in its environmental context. These challenges include retrieval, indexing, efficient storage, data integration, and analytical techniques.
This Addendum describes new, expanded, and planned water monitoring sites in the Lake Erie drainage basin that were initiated subsequent to the preparation of Betanzo et al. (2015), the primary report with which this Addendum is associated. In addition to the new water monitoring sites, new programs have been initiated that focus on expansion of agricultural management practices to reduce nutrient transport to Lake Erie and facilitate data sharing between researchers involved with agricultural management and water-quality monitoring. This Addendum evaluates the applicability of these new monitoring sites and programs for answering the case-study policy question explored in Betanzo et al. (2015), “How effective are agricultural management practices at reducing nutrients from nonpoint sources at the watershed scale in the Lake Erie drainage basin?” The water monitoring data needs for answering the case-study policy question identified in Table 18 of Betanzo et al. (2015) were used to identify relevant monitoring sites in this Addendum, specifically focusing on total phosphorus (TP), dissolved reactive phosphorus (DRP)1 , and streamflow data (the complete list of parameters needed appears in Table 3 of Betanzo et al. (2015)). The new information summarized in this Addendum consists of water monitoring and agricultural management activities conducted by agencies and organizations whose data were compiled in the nutrient data set described in Betanzo et al. (2015), and programs identified in public news releases. Although this information is considered to be comprehensive and complete as of February 2015, there may be other new or planned water monitoring programs, of which we are not aware, that are not included here.
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Community for Data Integration (CDI) Workshop was held during June 3–7, 2019, at Center Green in Boulder, Colo. The theme of the workshop was “From Big Data to Smart Data” with the purpose of bringing together the community to discuss current topics, shared challenges, and steps forward to advance twenty-first century science at the USGS. The workshop agenda was driven by the needs of the CDI with topics highlighting current resources and technologies that could help attendees in their daily work. Workshop-session categories included enabling integrated science, computing in the cloud, advancing data management, releasing and preserving science outputs, and improving usability and communication. These proceedings provide documentation of the plenary talks, topical-session content and notes, posters, live demonstrations, and attendee comments from the 2019 CDI Workshop.
Water resources data for the 2000 water year for Georgia consists of records of stage, discharge, and water quality of streams; and the stage and contents of lakes and reservoirs published in one volume in a digital format on a CD-ROM. This volume contains discharge records of 125 gaging stations; stage for 20 gaging stations; information for 18 lakes and reservoirs; continuous water-quality records for 10 stations; the annual peak stage and annual peak discharge for 77 crest-stage partial-record stations; and miscellaneous streamflow measurements at 21 stations. These data represent that part of the National Water Data System collected by the U.S. Geological Survey and cooperating State and Federal agencies in Georgia.
The Central Weather Bureau (CWB) of Taiwan completed a deployment of 1200 modern digital strong-motion instruments in 1996 at free-field sites and in buildings and bridges. Consequently, a very extensive set of strong-motion records were obtained for the M W = 7.6 Chi-Chi earthquake in 1999, including over 60 near-field records within 20 km of the fault ruptures. For documentation purposes, we included all relevant data files on the attached CD-ROM from our article, “CWB Free-Field Strong-Motion Data from the 21 September Chi-Chi, Taiwan, Earthquake” in this issue. We presented the data in four different ways to make the data more user friendly: (1) the original recorded data by accelerograph type; (2) the processed data in ASCII text format; (3) the processed data in SUDS format; and (4) the processed data in SAC format. (1)-(3) are exactly the same as in Lee et al. ( 2001 ), except the files are zipped (or compressed). (4) is provided for users using the SAC software on a Unix computer, and it also contains waveform plots of the data in PDF files for ease of viewing. The attached CD contains the full report of Lee et al. ( 2001 ) in 25 PDF files for viewing or printing. This full report described the data set and the data processing performed in details. It also contains plots of all processed data with an index map showing the fault, mainshock location, and the station location. We also provided a readme.txt on the CDROM to augment this Short Note with further explanations. We classify the recorded data files into four quality groups. Since the recorded strong-motion data are based on a triggering algorithm, a main concern is the amount of pre-event data and whether or not the record is long enough to cover the entire duration of the ground shaking at that station. In addition, we are concerned whether or not the record has defects (e.g., spikes, or a component was not recorded), and whether or not the record has absolute timing. In general, QA-class records are the best and can be used for any studies. QB-class records are the next best, except most of them do not have absolute timing. QC-class records cover the principal strong motions but may not have adequate pre-event data and/or post strong-motion data. QD-class records have some defects; they are included here for completeness and should not be used for most studies. Since most A800 accelerographs have a colocated A900 or A900A accelerograph, the user should use the A900 or A900A data files whenever possible. There are a readme file and six subdirectories containing the data files described in our article on the attached CDROM, under the directory of \LeeWHK: (1) readme.txt: an ASCII text file of this Short Note and additional explanations. (2) DOCfiles (subdirectory): documentary files in PDF format for viewing, and some files in ASCII text format for use in data processing. User should view or print the Reportxx.pdf files which describe the Chi-Chi strong-motion data set in details (xx is a number from 01 through 25). (3) Software (subdirectory): containing computer programs from the accelerograph manufacturers for viewing and converting the original recorded data; they are grouped by manufacturer. (4) ORGfiles (subdirectory): the original recorded data files grouped by accelerograph types; these files are for archival purposes only. (5) SUDfiles (subdirectory): the processed strong-motion data files in PC-SUDS format, and are grouped by quality class. (6) ASCfiles (subdirectory): the processed strong-motion data files are in ASCII text format and are grouped by quality class. (7) SACfiles (subdirectory): the processed strong-motion data files are in SAC format and are grouped by quality class. Within each quality class, the data are given by station. Each station has two files—xxx.pdf for viewing the three-component strong-motion data, and xxx_SAC.zip, a WINZIP file containing three SAC data files corresponding to the three components of the recorded acceleration. We use “xxx” here to denote the station name.
The use of data generated from long term monitoring efforts necessitates accurate authoritative source citations of those data to ensure credit for data collected, and accountability for the data quality to enable repeated retrieval of a given data set. Data sets used in published reports and articles are increasingly being considered objects that are required to be published and cited. Aggregating data into open access databases is becoming common and is the focus of the Coordinated Assessment for Salmon and Steelhead project (CA; https://www.pnamp.org/project/coordinated-assessments-for-salmon-and-steelhead; http://www.streamnet.org/data/coordinated-assessments/ ) and National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Salmon Population Summary (SPS; https://www.webapps.nwfsc.noaa.gov/apex/f?p=261:home:0 ) among others. Guidelines are needed for citing these long-term dynamic data sets that have many contributors. We explore best practices and provide recommendations for including robust metadata attributes within data sets to enable data publication and citation using the CA and SPS data repositories as case studies. F rom reviewing the current citations possible from the CA and the SPS we recommend at minimum that natural resource monitoring databases contain: metadata to identify organizations that generated the data; contact persons for each organization that contributes data to an aggregated data set; and that metadata be incorporated into databases to enable auto-generated citations that recognize all contributing organizations with time-stamped versions of the data delivered. Beyond those minimums, additional best practice recommendations include this suite of metadata elements that identify a given data set upon citation or publication: author(s); publication date; description of data; file format(s) of data - e.g. tiles, shapefile sets, images, text files; dates data were collected; locations where data were collected; producers/contributors to the data set version cited; date data set was downloaded; original data repository from which the data were obtained; version identifier to note significant change to a data set; and a persistent identifier that can be used to locate that version of the data.
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Water-Use Program is responsible for compiling and disseminating the Nation's water-use data. Working in cooperation with local, State, and Federal agencies, the USGS has collected and published national water-use estimates every 5 years, beginning in 1950. These water-use data may vary because of actual changes in water use, because of changes in estimation methods, or because of errors. Comparison and interpretation of these data is difficult without first determining the factors that contribute to data variability. This report describes factors that may affect data quality and documents ways to investigate the variability of public supply, self-supplied domestic, irrigation, and thermoelectric water-use data for the 1985–2015 compilations. The USGS produces national water-use estimates for various categories of water use for every county in the United States. Knowledge about the sources of data for county estimates is important because factors such as estimation methodology and reporting affect data uncertainty Determination of meaningful patterns and trends in the data are contingent on the use of consistent methodology throughout the period of interest. With the many ways that water-use data have been collected, assembled, and estimated, multiple factors likely contribute to data uncertainty, Data used to produce these estimates may be furnished from agencies that collect information from entities who report water use; gaps in reported data are typically estimated to achieve a comprehensive county estimate. For example, public supply and thermoelectric category data are based primarily on furnished site-specific data; whereas crop irrigation is often furnished or estimated at the county scale. Public supply deliveries for domestic use and self-supplied domestic withdrawals are most often estimated by USGS personnel using per capita use rate coefficients. Irrigation may be estimated using crop water requirements, application rates, or other soil water balance methods when furnished reported data are not available. Rates, percentages, medians, and interquartile ranges were used to investigate variability in the water-use data among States, regions, and years. The purposes of these evaluations were to (1) identify extreme values that may reflect changes in information sources, estimation methods, or errors; (2) indicate areas of variable or consistent values that are unexpected; and (3) indicate areas where values change because of local climate or other factors. Where factors are identified that contribute to data variability, such as a change in methodology, additional work could determine uncertainty because of these factors. These evaluations identified the availability of information that is needed to address data limitations. Factors such as estimation methodology affect data quality. Some updates to method codes assigned in 2015 and assignment of method codes to earlier compilation datasets for all categories would provide much needed metadata for users of the data. Improvements in data documentation describing sources of information and estimation methods and additional metadata information from agencies and entities that furnish water-use data, would enable a more complete understanding and depiction of water-use patterns and trends. Additional metadata are needed for users of the data to better understand the water-use data and interpret changes in water use across the United States and with time.
Executive Summary Modern transportation and land-use planning efforts include information from many sources to address topics such as safety, efficiency, commercial, and social needs. This wide breadth of topics provides opportunities for collaboration and development of common tools for diverse users. In many cases, different information systems provide the spatial data and geographic content necessary for transportation and land-use planners to consider multiple lines of evidence. The Federal Highway Administration Office of Federal Lands Highway (FLH) and Federal Land Management Agency partners use detailed spatial and quantitative data to inform transportation decisions. However, logistic challenges to data sharing exist because data are often managed by separate agencies; data-exchange frameworks and interagency data agreements are insufficient; and consistency from aggregated data requires maintenance, coordination, and supporting infrastructure. The FLH and U.S. Geological Survey collaboratively examined (1) use and availability of spatial data for transportation planning and (2) a possible mechanism to use more shared and consistent data in a common planning environment. The goals of this collaborative effort were to describe data needs from the perspective of planners and to identify opportunities for shared data resources. Results presented here focus on two workshops and a subsequent investigation of data and tools available from partner agencies. The objectives of this report are to (1) describe information used in transportation planning with geographic data; (2) identify spatially explicit data that inform transportation plans and could be shared among all partners; and (3) describe current platforms, planning and administrative opportunities, and potential barriers to developing an integrated planning tool. Key information and data needs were identified in three major classes: system, user, and influential factors. System data are parts of the transportation network and information about the condition of individual segments and the network. User data provide details about the function of the system and insights into potential needs; for example, user trips between source and destinations inform road and network demands that can lead to congestion and safety issues (in the future, user data might also include scenarios and projections based on land-use plans). Influential data represent social and environmental factors that influence transit demands and network conditions. These factors could be popular locations or seasonal events that influence demand and congestion; wildlife habitat or migration intersections that affect safety and management priorities; or geologic features that influence hazards, maintenance, and safety. Responses described here provide specific information for web-tool design and give a framework for interagency communication and cooperation to address specific information needs for integrated planning. Existing web-mapping and web-services, and the data that inform them, are also described. Commonly, these data are created and published by one agency, and the core users are outside of that agency; for example, threatened species distributions are published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for consideration by planners in advance of National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) evaluation. This report is provided to inform FLH leaders and Federal Land Management Agency partners by articulating user needs and requirements for integrated planning tool(s). Programmers creating a secure web-based data-sharing platform (with data-viewing, -analysis and -download functions) can use the information presented here to organize data and user interfaces. This integrated perspective can help FLH and Federal Land Management Agency partners develop transportation networks that better serve the needs of people in local communities and across States and the Nation.
The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with Federal, State, county, and industry partners, developed a Web-accessible common data repository to provide access to historical and current (as of August 2009) water-quality information (available on the Internet at http://rmgsc.cr.usgs.gov/cwqdr/Piceance/index.shtml ). Surface-water-quality data from public and private sources were compiled for the period 1931 to 2009 and loaded into the common data repository for the Piceance Basin. A subset of surface-water-quality data for 1959 to 2009 from the repository were compiled, reviewed, and checked for quality assurance for this report. This report contains data summaries, comparisons to water-quality standards, trend analyses, a generalized spatial analysis, and a data-gap analysis for select water-quality properties and constituents. Summary statistics and a comparison to standards were provided for 347 sites for 33 constituents including field properties, nutrients, major ions, trace elements, suspended sediment, Escherichia coli, and BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene). When sufficient data were available, trends over time were analyzed and loads were calculated for those sites where there were also continuous streamflow data. The majority of sites had information on field properties. Water temperature data was available for 316 sites where data were collected between 1959 and 2009. The only trend that was detected in temperature was an upward trend at the Gunnison River near Grand Junction, Colorado. There were 326 values out of a total of 32,006 values in the study area that exceeded the aquatic-life standard for daily maximum water temperature. For the entire study area, 196 sites had dissolved-oxygen data collected between 1970 and 2009, and median dissolved-oxygen concentrations ranged from 6.8 to11.2 milligrams per liter (mg/L). There were 185 concentrations that exceeded the dissolved oxygen aquatic-life standard out of a total of 11,248 values. The pH data were available for 276 sites, and median pH values ranged from 7.5 to 9.0. There were 241 values that exceeded the high pH standard and 13 values that were less than the low pH standard of the 16,790 values in the study area. Nutrients within the study area were not well represented in each basin and were often not being sampled currently. For the entire study area, 62 sites had nitrate data collected between 1958 and 2009, and median nitrate concentrations ranged from less than detection to 3.72 mg/L as nitrogen. The maximum contaminant level for domestic water supply for nitrate is 10 mg/L and was exceeded once in 3,736 samples. Total phosphorus was collected at 113 sites between 1974 and 2009, and median total phosphorus concentrations ranged from less than detection to 5.04 mg/L. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recommendation for phosphorus is less than 0.1 mg/L, and 1,469 of 4,842 samples exceeded this recommended standard. An upward trend in both nitrate and total phosphorus was detected in the White River above Coal Creek near Meeker, Colo. Standards for major ions exist only for chloride and sulfate. For the entire study area, 118 sites had both chloride and sulfate concentration data collected between 1958 and 2009. Median chloride concentrations ranged from 0.085 mg/L to 280 mg/L. Median sulfate concentrations ranged from 4.57 mg/L to 15,000 mg/L. Both chloride and sulfate domestic water-supply standards are 250 mg/L. There were 120 chloride concentrations and 1,111 sulfate concentration samples that exceeded these standards. A downward trend in dissolved solids was detected at the Colorado River near the Colorado-Utah state border and could be a result of salinity control work near Grand Junction, Colo. Trace elements were relatively well represented both temporally and spatially in the study area though the number of trace element samples per site was not typically enough to compute trends or loads except for selenium. There were 127 sites that had dissolved iron concentration data collected between 1961 and 2009, and median iron concentrations ranged from less than detection to 1,100 micrograms per liter (µg/L). The 30-day drinking-water standard for iron is 300 µg/L, and 203 samples exceeded the standard. Selenium was the best represented trace element with selenium concentration data collected at 197 sites between 1973 and 2009, and median selenium concentrations range from less than detection to 181 µg/L. The chronic standard of 4.6 µg/L for selenium concentrations was exceeded in 899 samples, and the acute aquatic-life standard of 18.4 µg/ for selenium was exceeded in 629 samples. High concentrations of selenium are of concern in the Lower Gunnison River Basin because of the combination of geologic formations and land use. There were significant downward trends in selenium at both main-stem sites on the Gunnison River at Delta, Colo., and the Gunnison River near Grand Junction, Colo. High selenium concentrations correlate with high salinity concentrations; thus, when salinity control efforts are conducted in selenium-rich areas in the Lower Gunnison River Basin, both salinity and selenium have the potential to decrease. Spatial, temporal, and analytical data gaps were identified in the study area. The spatial coverage of sampling sites could be expanded in the White River Basin by adding more tributary sites. No water-quality data exist for tributary streams in the area north of Rangely, Colo., where extensive energy development has occurred in a complex geologic setting. Douglas Creek has a drainage area of 425 square miles and has limited historic water-quality and water-quantity data. Limited data were available for field properties, major ions, nutrients, and trace elements on the main stem of the Colorado River between Glenwood Springs and Cameo, Colo. Nutrient data were minimally collected upstream from Colorado River at the Colorado-Utah state border and on the Gunnison River (major tributary in the reach). Approximately 30 percent of the samples for total phosphorus in the Lower Gunnison River Basin exceeded the recommended standard, yet there were insufficient data to do trends analysis in the Lower Gunnison River Basin except at the Gunnison near Grand Junction site. There is limited trace element data except for selenium in the Lower Gunnison River Basin. Additional sampling is necessary to understand the occurrence, concentrations, and loads of these constituents.