Ferruginous hawk (Buteo regalis)
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
FWS/OBS↗
SEARCH · Geology Reports
Results for “FWS/OBS”
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.
Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States
This classification, to be used in a new inventory of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States, is intended to describe ecological taxa, arrange them in a system useful to resource managers, furnish units for mapping, and provide uniformity of concepts and terms. Wetlands are defined by plants (hydrophytes), soils (hydric soils), and frequency of flooding. Ecologically related areas of deep water, traditionally not considered wetlands, are included in the classification as deepwater habitats.Systems form the highest level of the classification hierarchy; five are defined-Marine, Estuarine, Riverine, Lacustrine, and Palustrine. Marine and Estuarine Systems each have two Subsystems, Subtidal and Intertidal; the Riverine System has four Subsystems, Tidal, Lower Perennial, Upper Perennial, and Intermittent; the Lacustrine has two, Littoral and Limnetic; and the Palustrine has no Subsystems.Within the Subsystems, Classes are based on substrate material and flooding regime, or on vegetative life form. The same Classes may appear under one or more of the Systems or Subsystems. Six Classes are based on substrate and flooding regime: (1) Rock Bottom with a substrate of bedrock, boulders, or stones; (2) Unconsolidated Bottom with a substrate of cobbles, gravel, sand, mud, or organic material; (3) Rocky Shore with the same substrates as Rock Bottom; (4) Unconsolidated Shore with the same substrates as Unconsolidated Bottom; (5) Streambed with any of the substrates; and (6) Reef with a substrate composed of the living and dead remains of invertebrates (corals, mollusks, or worms). The bottom Classes, (1) and (2) above, are flooded all or most of the time and the shore Classes, (3) and (4), are exposed most of the time. The Class Streambed is restricted to channels of intermittent streams and tidal channels that are dewatered at low tide. The life form of the dominant vegetation defines the five Classes based on vegetative form: (1) Aquatic Bed, dominated by plants that grow principally on or below the surface of the water; (2) Moss-Lichen Wetland, dominated by mosses or lichens; (3) Emergent Wetland, dominated by emergent herbaceous angiosperms; (4) Scrub-Shrub Wetland, dominated by shrubs or small trees; and (5) Forested Wetland, dominated by large trees.The Dominance Type, which is named for the dominant plant or animal forms, is the lowest level of the classification hierarchy. Only examples are provided for this level; Dominance Types must be developed by individual users of the classification.Modifying terms applied to the Classes or Subclasses are essential for use of the system. In tidal areas, the type and duration of flooding are described by four Water Regime Modifiers: subtidal, irregularly exposed, regularly flooded, and irregularly flooded. In nontidal areas, eight Regimes are used: permanently flooded, intermittently exposed, semipermanently flooded, seasonally flooded, saturated, temporarily flooded, intermittently flooded, and artificially flooded. A hierarchical system of Water Chemistry Modifiers, adapted from the Venice System, is used to describe the salinity of the water. Fresh waters are further divided on the basis of pH. Use of a hierarchical system of soil modifiers taken directly from U.S. soil taxonomy is also required. Special modifiers are used where appropriate: excavated, impounded, diked, partly drained, farmed, and artificial.Regional differences important to wetland ecology are described through a regionalization that combines a system developed for inland areas by R. G. Bailey in 1976 with our Marine and Estuarine provinces.The structure of the classification allows it to be used at any of several hierarchical levels. Special data required for detailed application of the system are frequently unavailable, and thus data gathering may be prerequisite to classification. Development of rules by the user will be required for specific map scales. Dominance Types and relationships of plant and anima
FWS/OBS↗
Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States
This classification, to be used in a new inventory of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States, is intended to describe ecological taxa, arrange them in a system useful to resource managers, furnish units for mapping, and provide uniformity of concepts and terms. Wetlands are defined by plants (hydrophytes), soils (hydric soils), and frequency of flooding. Ecologically related areas of deep water, traditionally not considered wetlands, are included in the classification as deepwater habitats.Systems form the highest level of the classification hierarchy; five are defined--Marine, Estuarine, Riverine, Lacustrine, and Palustrine. Marine and Estuarine systems each have two subsystems, Subtidal and Intertidal; the Riverine system has four subsystems, Tidal, Lower Perennial, Upper Perennial, and Intermittent; the Lacustrine has two, Littoral and Limnetic; and the Palustrine has no subsystem.Within the subsystems, classes are based on substrate material and flooding regime, or on vegetative life form. The same classes may appear under one or more of the systems or subsystems. Six classes are based on substrate and flooding regime: (1) Rock Bottom with a substrate of bedrock, boulders, or stones; (2) Unconsolidated Bottom with a substrate of cobbles, gravel, sand, mud, or organic material; (3) Rocky Shore with the same substrate as Rock Bottom; (4) Unconsolidated Shore with the same substrate as Unconsolidated Bottom; (5) Streambed with any of the substrates; and (6) Reef with a substrate composed of the living and dead remains of invertebrates (corals, mollusks, or worms). The bottom classes, (1) and (2) above, are flooded all or most of the time and the shore classes, (3) and (4), are exposed most of the time. The class Streambed is restricted to channels of intermittent streams and tidal channels that are dewatered at low tide. The life form of the dominant vegetation defines the five classes based on vegetative form: (1) Aquatic Bed, dominated by plants that grow principally on or below the surface of the water; (2) Moss-Lichen Wetland, dominated by mosses or lichens; (3) Emergent Wetland, dominated by emergent herbaceous angiosperms; (4) Scrub-Shrub Wetland, dominated by shrubs or small trees; and (5) Forested Wetland, dominated by large trees.The dominance type, which is named for the dominant plant or animal forms, is the lowest level of the classification hierarchy. Only examples are provided for this level; dominance types must be developed by individual users of the classification.Modifying terms applied to the classes or subclasses are essential for use of the system. In tidal areas, the type and duration of flooding are described by four water regime modifiers: subtidal, irregularly exposed, regularly flooded, and irregularly flooded. In nontidal areas, six regimes are used: permanently flooded, intermittently exposed, semipermanently flooded, seasonally flooded, saturated, temporarily flooded, intermittently flooded, and artificially flooded. A hierarchical system of water chemistry modifiers, adapted from the Venice System, is used to describe the salinity of the water. Fresh waters are further divided on the basis of pH. Use of a hierarchical system of soil modifiers taken directly from U.S. soil taxonomy is also required. Special modifiers are used where appropriate: excavated, impounded, diked, partly drained, farmed, and artificial.Regional differences important to wetland ecology are described through a regionalization that combines a system developed for inland areas by R. G. Bailey in 1976 with our Marine and Estuarine provinces.The structure of the classification allows it to be used at any of several hierarchical levels. Special data required for detailed application of the system are frequently unavailable, and thus data gathering may be prerequisite to classification. Development of rules by the user will be required for specific map scales. Dominance types and relationships of plant and animal co
FWS/OBS↗
Avian mortality at man-made structures: an annotated bibliography
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
FWS/OBS↗
The East Mojave Desert: An example of inventory design and habitat analysis
No abstract available at this time
FWS/OBS↗
Biological and economic impact of stream alteration in the Virginia Piedmont
A 31 month (September 1974 - March 1977) study was conducted on warmwater streams located in the Roanoke Creek watershed of the Piedmont Region of Virginia. The purpose of the study was to determine the effects of stream channelization on the aquatic/riparian wildlife resource and agricultural land-use patterns associated with the altered streams. Three streams, which were channelized 3, 6, and 10 years prior to initiation of the study, and teo unaltered streams, were selected as representative streams for the study. Recently channelized streams lacked overstory cover but has an abundance of herbaceous and small woody plany cover, Conversely, control streams had significantly larger percentages of trees over 46 m tall. Plant species diversity, foliage height diversity, and evenness diversity increased as age since channelization increased. No major differences in water quality parameters were found for either channelized or control streams, although channelized streams had greater deposits of sand and lesser amount of rock, rubble, and gravel. These changes in substrate composition did not significantly modify actual stream flow rates. Fish species composition and species diversity among channelized and unchannelized streams were only slightly different, with most of the differences probably attributable to strays from adjacent habitats, However, evenness diversity for fish communities was lower in channelized streams. The benthic population showed greater changes than did the fish populations with an increase in Chironominae tolerant of unstable sand substrates in channelized streams. Evenness diversity of benthic populations was also higher and showed more consistency in the control stream than in channelized streams. Evenness diversity of benthic communities in control stream averaged between 0.5 to 0.6 and was quite consistent; whereas, the average in the two youngest channelized streams was 0.3 to 0.4. These data seem to indicate decreased stability of the biota in altered streams. In general, benthic macroinvertabrate and fish community parameters collected from channelized streams located 1200 m below a reservoir were either comparable to, or intermediate between, upstream (unchannelized) and reservoir tailwater values. The shallow surface discharge impoundments associated with channelized streams appeared to have a highly localized impact on the downstream benthic marcoinvertabrate and fish communities. During winter, bird species diversity (BSD) among channelized stream sites was not significantly different. During the breeding season, species richness (number of breeding species) and BSD increased with age since channelization. Breeding bird densities were 6.2 pairs/ha in the most recent (3 yr) channelized site and 13.3 pairs/ha on the control streams. Bird diversity and density, particularly for Parulids (warblers), during the breeding season were reduced significantly by removal of tree and shrub layers along channelized streams. No significant differences were found among study sites for either total number of small mammals or their species diversity indices; although, there was a trend toward increasing diversity as age since channelization increased. Smaller differences in species diversity values for small mammals on channelized sites than for birds suggests that small mammal populations require less time for recovery following channelization than avian communities. When streams are channelized: 1) vegetation should be removed from only one side of the stream, with minimal disturbance of top-soil; followed by plantings of herbaceous and woody vegetation, 2) hedgrow plantings should be maintained between agricultural fields and the stream for bank stabilization, 3) dead snags and large trees should be left for birds, 4) all channelization projects should be designed according to the most recent guidelines recommended by the SCS and other resources agencies. In 1958, the Roanoke County Watershed Work Plan projected annual costs of the structured measures (mainly reservoirs and downstream channelization) to be $79,897 and the average annual monetary benefits to be $111,103. With this favorable benefit/cost ration of 1.4, work began in 1960. In 1970, the annual capital cost was 60,780 and operations/maintenance costs were 10,402, or a total annual project cost of $71, 182. High and low values of annual benefits from agricultural income, water supply, recreation, and non-agricultural flood damage were determined for 1970 and compared to annual project cost. The benefit/cost ratio obtained was between 0.25 and 0.58, considerably lower than the 1.4 estimate of the 1958. work plan. This unsatisfactory ratio for the project was due mainly to the failure of the project to encourage large scale cropping of bottomland area. Future projects should be planned with 1) a greater recognition of constraints on farm operator behavior which affect land use change, 2) conservative projection for land use changes in area where agriculture ids in overall decline, 3) increased use of sensitivity analysis to examine the consequences for project economic justification of alternative land use change projections.
Virginia↗
Water resources planning under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
This paper briefly discusses the more significant provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (1958). It covers pertinent aspects of legislative history, the development and current status (April 1980) of certain policies relevant to administering the Act, and other matters. It is directed primarily to practicing fish and wildlife agency field biologists, planners, and decisionmakers engaged in water resources development activities under the Act. It is not intended to be exhaustive in its treatment. The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act provides a basic procedural framework for the orderly consideration of fish and wildlife conservation measures to be incorporated into Federal and Federally permitted or licensed water development projects. The principal provisions of the Act include: 1. a statement of Congressional purpose that fish and wildlife conservation shall receive equal consideration with other project features; 2. mandatory consultation with wildlife agencies with a view to achieving such conservation; 3. full consideration by action of the recommendations stemming from consultation; 4. authority for action agencies to implement such recommendations as they find acceptable. The FWCA in effect amends, conditions, or supplements other Federal laws and is thus closely linked in its application and interpretation. It is similarly linked to Federal planning standards and procedures. Because of this, interpretations tend to be flexible and evolve, adapting to changing situations. The following reference matrix outlines selected sections of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act which are of particular relevance to planners.
FWS/OBS↗
Liming of acidified waters: issues and research - a report of the International Liming Workshop
Acidic deposition is a problem of significant national and international concern. It is strongly suspected that acidic deposition has adversely affected aquatic resources in Scandinavia and North America. While substantial resources are being devoted to understanding the causative factors associated with surface water acidification, much less research is being conducted on mitigative strategies. Mitigative techniques involving liming may be useful for short-term protection of specific component of aquatic communities or for renovation of seriously impacted aquatic ecosystems. The selection of effective liming strategies is based on an integrated understanding of the following key factors: biological systems, water chemistry, sediment chemistry, hydrology, and watershed characteristics, effectiveness of neutralizing materials, and application techniques. Research in Scandinavia, Canada, and the U.S. has led to a partial understanding of some of the key factors for successful neutralization of surface waters (Bengtsson, 1982; Fraser and Britt, 1982). However, conflicting results of liming operations and experiments have been reported. (Fraser et al., 1982; Fraser and Britt, 1982; Sverdrup and Bjerle, 1982). Additional research is required to improve the ability of scientists and resource managers to select effective liming strategies. An International Liming workshop was convened during 19-25 September 1982 at the University of Washington's Friday Harbor Laboratories. The major objective of this workshop were: - To identify the most critical deficiencies in the scientific understanding of liming techniques and their long-term consequences. - To develop and document a research strategy to address information deficiencies that are pertinent to the protection or renovation of acidic surface waters in the United States. The participants who contributed to this workshop are listed in Table 1.
FWS/OBS↗
MOSS user's manual
The Map Overlay and Statistical System (MOSS) Users' Manual is specialized document has been designed for trained users of the MOSS interactive graphics software. Those totally unfamiliar with MOSS or Geographic Information Systems are referred elsewhere as described below: -- If you know nothing about MOSS or what it can do for you, and you wish introductory information on MOSS, or you want to deign an application and data entry process compatible with MOSS, or you want "hands-on" training, contact the WELUT Team Leader at the address below for a "hands-on" GIS training session. -- If you have been introduced to MOSS, have your application defined, data entered, and want to know how to use MOSS, start reading at Section 1 of this Manual. --If you are interested in the MOSS data structure, refer to Section 2 of this Manual. --If you have some experience in using MOSS and want to refer to the general types of MOSS commands, read Section 3 of this Manual. --If you are an experience MOSS user and want details on individual MOSS commands, refer to Section 4.3 of this Manual. --If you are interested in the Federation of Rocky Mountain States -- WELUT 02 Project contractual background results, turn to Appendices D and E of this Manual. MOSS has been operation for less than 3 months, and has received limited operational testing at the date of this printing (October 1978). Undiscovered software limitations and bugs may yet appear. All such bugs as well as documentation errors, obscurities, and inadequacies should be reported to: Team Leader Western Energy and Land Use Team (WELUT) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Drake Creekside Building 2625 Redwing Road Fort Collins, Colorado 80526
FWS/OBS↗
Tactical approach for determining impact of energy development on wildlife in Wyoming: special report number 1
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, within the Department of Interior, is responsible for providing national leadership in the management and protection of the nation's fish and wildlife resources, their habitat, and environment. Specifically, the Office of Biological Services obtains and assimilates biological and environmental data and identifies additional informational needs and means necessary to provide biological input into major natural resource decisions. The Wyoming Coal Coordinator for the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service is assigned the duty of becoming attuned to the ramifications of energy development within the State and its potential impact upon wildlife. In order for the Coal Coordinator to fulfill his obligations in becoming an "energy expert" for the Fish and Wildlife Service in Wyoming, it will be necessary for him to develop a means of obtaining an overview of the energy development situation. Similarly, in order for him to identify those area of critical concern to wildlife resources, it will be necessary that he determine or predict where energy development will occur, the nature of this development, and the cumulative effects of energy development upon wildlife. Likewise, in order to identify where wildlife data gaps occur and to determine future wildlife information needs, it will be necessary for him to compile and synthesize relevant existing data resources. It therefore becomes apparent that a need exists for him to gather and interpret pertinent information in a systematic way to meet these ends. The following is an account of the tactical number in which the Wyoming Coal Coordinator intends to approach the duties outlined above the rationale to be followed in meeting these needs. First, a general discussion on assessing impacts on wildlife is provided to form a basis for obtaining an overview. Secondly, a series of reports which will be generated to summarize existing information and to help identify potential problem areas is outlined. These reports will be further utilized to determine wildlife data gaps and future information needs related to wildlife and future energy development.
Wyoming↗
Coal: special report number 2
The Fish and Wildlife Service has extensive biological expertise within the Department of Interior and exerts national leadership in the management and protection of the nation's fish and wildlife resources, their habitat, and environment. Specifically, the Office of Biological Services obtains and assimilates biological and environmental data and identifies additional informational needs and means to provide environmental and biological input into major natural resource decisions. Coal Coordinators assist in carrying out Fish and Wildlife Service involvement in the Interior Department Coal Leasing Program through a multi-stage process designed to assemble existing fish and wildlife inventory data and to prioritize fish and wildlife values in areas subject to coal leasing and associated development. This report is designed to identify possible areas of concern for wildlife and its habitat in Wyoming in the development of coal and the associate implication of land use changes. This report summarizes past and present development of the coal resource in Wyoming in anticipation of future identification of data needs for making sound resource decisions in the development of coal.
FWS/OBS↗
Geothermal handbook
The Bureau of Land Management offered over 400,000 hectares (one million acres) for geothermal exploration and development in 1975, and figure is expected to double this year. The Energy Research and Development Administration hopes for 10-15,000 megawatts of geothermal energy by 1985, which would require, leasing over 16.3 million hectares (37 million acres) of land, at least half of which is federal land. Since there is an 8 to 8-1/2 year time laf between initial exploration and full field development, there would have to be a ten-fold increase in the amount of federal land leased within the next three years. Seventy percent of geothermal potential, 22.3 million hectares (55 million acres), is on federal lands in the west. The implication for the Service are enormous and the problems immediate. Geothermal resource are so widespread they are found to some extent in most biomes and ecosystems in the western United States. In most cases exploitation and production of geothermal resources can be made compatible with fish and wildlife management without damage, if probable impacts are clearly understood and provided for before damage has unwittingly been allowed to occur. Planning for site suitability and concern with specific operating techniques are crucial factors. There will be opportunities for enhancement: during exploration and testing many shallow groundwater bodies may be penetrated which might be developed for wildlife use. Construction equipment and materials needed for enhancement projects will be available in areas heretofore considered remote projects will be available in areas heretofore considered remote by land managers. A comprehensive knowledge of geothermal development is necessary to avoid dangers and seize opportunities. This handbook is intended to serve as a working tool in the field. It anticipated where geothermal resource development will occur in the western United States in the near future. A set of environmental assessment procedures are presented which will allow the Service to provide input to the federal leasing process. As an impact information source by which to judge the appropriateness of a specific activity at a specific site, a discussion of activities-impacts is provided on a phase by phase basis. Mitigation and possible enhancement techniques are also presented so that the impacts of the development can be dealt with and the fish and wildlife situation improved. The Service can achieve its objective only if biological input is made throughout the entire process of geothermal development, from exploration to testing to full field operation. A discussion of geothermal leasing procedures emphasizes the timing and nature of Service participation in current interagency lease processing, and there is a provision for the utilization of new knowledge, techniques, and responses as experience is accumulated.
FWS/OBS↗
Wildlife and oil shale: a problem analysis and research program: volume 1
No abstract available.
FWS/OBS↗
Wildlife and oil shale: a problem analysis and research program: volume 2, appendix and bibliography
This appendix is designed to apply to the program of studies recommended in the problem analysis and research program Volume I. It has two purposes: (1) to provide reference that may be used in the preparation of requests for proposals or for studies, and (2) to suggest a core group of references for a reference library for research. The references that follow are listed taxonomically as follows: A. Aquatic Ecosystems B. Water Quality C. Terrestrial Ecosystems D. Industrial Impacts on Wildlife E. Reptiles and Amphibians F. Blood-sucking Arthropods and Disease Vectors This bibliography is not integrated because it was believed that it would be more useful with the sources separate. It also does not attempt to cover the entire field. It is, however, a listing that will be most useful in the description of the region and its environmental processes.
FWS/OBS↗
Double-crested cormorant (Phalacrocorx aruitus)
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
FWS/OBS↗