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.
The Information Resources Management (IRM) Team, in the Geographic Information Office (GIO) of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), manages compliance with information mandates defined by Public Law, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) (specifically Circular A- 130), the National Archives and Records Administration, the Department of the Interior (DOl), and other official sources. The team uses a variety of mechanisms to fulfill USGS IRM requirements from coordination through USGS-wide teams, to topical training sessions, to one-on-one communications with individual USGS programs. In addition, the team serves as a bureau contact for Federal Register notices and as the group contact for USGS Federal Advisory Committees. Currently, an IRM employee-awareness training course is being developed, in coordination with the DOl, that will provide an overview of IRM requirements. Below is a list of some of the Federal mandates for which the IRM team ensures USGS compliance.
Pursuant to Section 7002 (“Mineral Security”) of Title VII (“Critical Minerals”) of the Energy Act of 2020 (Public Law 116–260, December 27, 2020, 116th Cong.), the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the U.S. Geological Survey, is tasked with reviewing and revising the methodology used to evaluate mineral criticality and the U.S. Critical Minerals List no less than every 3 years. The initial Critical Minerals List was published in the Federal Register on May 18, 2018, in response to Executive Order No. 13817, A Federal Strategy to Ensure Secure and Reliable Supplies of Critical Minerals (3 CFR, 2017 Comp, p. 397–399). This report documents the updated evaluation methodology and the resultant updated draft list of minerals recommended for inclusion in the Critical Minerals List.
The Yellowstone grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos ) was listed as a threatened species in 1975 (Federal Register 40 FR:31734-31736). Since listing, recovery efforts have focused on increasing population size, improving habitat security, managing bear mortalities, and reducing bear-human conflicts. The Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee (IGBC; partnership of federal and state agencies responsible for grizzly bear recovery in the lower 48 states) and its Yellowstone Ecosystem Subcommitte (YES; federal, state, county, and tribal partners charged with recovery of grizzly bears in the Greater Yelowston Ecosystem [GYE]) tasked the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team to provide information and further research relevant to three concerns arising from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals November 2011 decision: 1) the ability of grizzly bears as omnivores to find alternative foods to whitebark pine seeds; 2) literature to support their conclusions; and 3) the non-intuitive biological reality that impacts can occur to individuals without causing the overall population to decline. Specifically, the IGBC and YES requested a comprehensive synthesis of the current state of knowledge regarding whitebark pinbe decline and individual and population-level responses of grizzly bears to changing food resources in the GYE. This research was particularly relevant to grizzly bear conservation given changes in the population trajectory observed during the last decade.
Avitrol© is the registered trade name of a number of proprietary bird control products containing the active ingredient 4-aminopyridine (4-AP). Several formulations of Avitrol are available to pest control applicators for use in agricultural areas. Although individual treated bait particles contain from 0.5 to 3.0% 4-AP, the amount present in the 14 federally registered products ranges from 0.3 to 1.0%, depending on the proportion of treated to untreated particles in the ready-to-use baits. Individual birds in depredating flocks ingesting 1 or more of the treated particles exhibit erratic behavior which frightens other birds in the flock. Numerous published references are available which describe the use and results of 1 or more of these products under a variety of conditions (Goodhue and Baumgartner 1965, DeGrazio et al. 1972, Stickley et al. 1972, Dolbeer et al. 1976, Stickley et al. 1976, Besser and Guarino 1977, Knittle et al. 1977, Mott 1977, Stick ley et al. 1977, Besser 1978, Woronecki et al. 1979).
The wildland-urban interface (WUI) is the focus of many important land management issues, such as wildfire, habitat fragmentation, invasive species, and human-wildlife conflicts. Wildfire is an especially critical issue, because housing growth in the WUI increases wildfire ignitions and the number of homes at risk. Identifying the WUI is important for assessing and mitigating impacts of development on wildlands and for protecting homes from natural hazards, but data on housing development for large areas are often coarse. We created new WUI maps for the conterminous U.S. based on 125 million individual building locations, offering higher spatial precision compared to existing maps based on U.S. census housing data. Building point locations were based on a building footprint dataset from Microsoft®. We classified WUI across the conterminous U.S. at 30-m resolution using a circular neighborhood mapping algorithm with a variable radius to determine thresholds of housing density and vegetation cover. We used our maps to (1) determine the total area of the WUI and number of buildings included, (2) assess the sensitivity of WUI area included and spatial pattern of WUI maps to choice of neighborhood size, (3) assess regional differences between building-based WUI maps and census-based WUI maps, and (4) determine how building location accuracy affected WUI map accuracy. Our building-based WUI maps identified 5.6% – 18.8% of the conterminous U.S. as being in the WUI, with larger neighborhoods increasing WUI area but excluding isolated building clusters. Building-based maps identified more WUI area relative to census-based maps for all but the smallest neighborhoods, particularly in the north-central states, and large differences were attributable to high numbers of non-housing structures in rural areas. Overall WUI classification accuracy was 98.0%. For wildfire risk mapping and for general purposes, WUI maps based on the 500-m neighborhood represent the original Federal Register definition of the WUI; these maps include clusters of buildings in and adjacent to wildlands and exclude remote, isolated buildings. Our approach for mapping the WUI offers flexibility and high spatial detail, and can be widely applied to take advantage of the growing availability of high-resolution building footprint datasets and classification methods.
Between 1973 and 1999, 43 species in the United States were reclassified from endangered to threatened or removed entirely from the Endangered Species List. Of these, 23 were identified as recovered. In 1999 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ( USFWS) published a list of 33 additional species for possible reclassification and/or delisting. We initiated this study to examine why some endangered species recover but others continue to decline and to identify differences in management activities between these two groups. We defined recovered/recovering species as previously recovered species and the additional recovered/recovering species listed by the USFWS. We defined declining species as those identified as declining in the most recent USFWS Report to Congress. Information on recovered/recovering and declining species was gathered from relevant literature, recovery plans, U.S. Federal Register documents, and individuals responsible for the recovery management of each species. We used this information to examine (1) the percentage of current and historic range covered by management activities; (2) threats affecting the species; (3) population sizes at the time of listing; (4) current versus historic range size; and (5) percentage of recovery management objectives completed. Although few statistical analyses provided significant results, those that did suggest the following differences between recovered/recovering and declining species: (1) recovered/recovering species face threats that are easier to address; (2) recovered/recovering species occupy a greater percentage of their historic range; and (3) recovered/recovering species have a greater percentage of their recovery management objectives completed. Those species with threats easier to address and that occupy a greater percentage of their historic range are recovered/recovering. In contrast, declining species face threats more difficult to address and occupy significantly less of their historic range. If this remains true, future species recovery may require more time and resources.
Greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasiunus , hereafter sage-grouse) are broadly distributed, occupy a diversity of sagebrush habitats, and face multiple threats. As a result of these threats, sage-grouse populations are declining and are now absent from almost one-half of their estimated range prior to Euro-American settlement. The risks to sage-grouse are significant enough to merit candidate status for this species for listing under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (Federal Register Notice, March 5, 2010). According to this decision by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 2010, population and habitat fragmentation coupled with lack of regulatory mechanisms warranted listing, although implementation of actions has been precluded by other priorities. Candidate status for listing under the Endangered Species Act and possible regulatory action in the near future provide strong motivation to better understand the dynamics of sage-grouse populations and their habitat requirements. The general approach currently taken by managers focuses on maintaining or enhancing sage-grouse populations across their distribution in regions containing the highest densities of breeding birds and their important seasonal habitats, also known as priority areas for conservation (PACs). The rationale behind this approach is that it permits limited resources to be applied in regions that have the greatest potential to benefit the largest proportion of sage-grouse. Development and other forms of land use can then proceed under standard regulations in areas outside PACs. Implementation of this approach requires detailed information about habitat, connections among sage-grouse populations, and approaches to restore and maintain sagebrush. These are important topics of study by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and its research partners.
The purpose of this study was to continue annual monitoring of Roanoke logperch ( Percina rex ), an endangered fish, in the Smith River immediately upstream from Philpott Reservoir. This river reach is owned by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), which must ensure that appropriate actions are undertaken to aid in recovery of logperch. Monitoring of fish abundance and habitat conditions provides a means for assessing the species’ status and its responses to USACE management actions. The Roanoke logperch is a large darter (Percidae: Etheostomatinae) endemic to the Roanoke, Dan, and Nottoway River basins of Virginia and North Carolina, where it occupies third- to sixth-order streams containing relatively silt-free substrate (Jenkins and Burkhead, 1994). Because of its rarity, small range, and vulnerability to siltation, the Roanoke logperch was listed in 1989 as endangered under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) (U.S. Federal Register 54:34468-34472). Within the Dan basin, Roanoke logperch have long been known to occupy the Smith River and one of its largest tributaries, Town Creek (Jenkins and Burkhead, 1994). Logperch also recently were discovered in other tributaries of the Dan River, including North Carolina segments of the Mayo River, Cascade Creek, Big Beaver Island Creek, Wolf Island Creek (William Hester, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, personal commun., 2012). Within the Smith River, Roanoke logperch are present both upstream and downstream from Philpott Reservoir, a hydroelectric and water storage project owned and operated by the USACE. Although logperch have not been observed in the reservoir itself, the species is relatively abundant in a free-flowing, ≈ 2.5-km-long segment of Smith River upstream from the reservoir on USACE property (Lahey and Angermeier, 2006). This segment is bounded on the downstream end by the lentic conditions of the reservoir and on the upstream end by White Falls, a natural waterfall that presumably allows fish passage during all but the lowest streamflow (Roberts and Angermeier, 2009). The ESA stipulates that USACE must ensure that its actions do not jeopardize Roanoke logperch and ensure that appropriate actions are taken to aid in the recovery of Roanoke logperch. USACE recognized that additional information was needed to assess compliance with these stipulations, including data on baseline population levels, habitat availability, and potential threats to the species on USACE property. USACE therefore contracted with Virginia Tech (VT) and the U.S. Geological Survey via the Virginia Cooperative Fisheries and Wildlife Research Unit (VCFWRU) to continue ecological monitoring that was initiated in a pilot study in 2005 (Lahey and Angermeier, 2006). The VCFWRU is jointly sponsored by the U.S. Geological Survey, Virginia Tech, Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, and Wildlife Management Institute. This final report summarizes results of biological monitoring performed by VT and the VCFWRU in 2011, and compares these data to data collected during 2006–2010 (Roberts and Angermeier, 2011). Where appropriate, a comparison was made to data on Roanoke logperch collected previously in the study reach (Lahey and Angermeier, 2006) and in the upper Roanoke River (Roberts and Angermeier, 2011). This work was performed under the auspices of VT’s Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) protocol 11-035-FIW. Specifically, the following objectives were addressed: * Estimate population density of Roanoke logperch on USACE property; * Measure and map by suitability class the distribution of habitat suitable for Roanoke logperch in the project area; * Assess water quality relative to Roanoke logperch habitat in the project area; * Use the data on logperch abundance, habitat suitability, and water quality to test the general validity of correlates of logperch abundance from other locations; * Identify opportunities and threats related to protecting and enhancing Roanoke logperch habitat; and * Provide suggestions on the necessity and scale of future studies and monitoring related to logperch in and near USACE waters.
Pursuant to the Presidential Executive Order (EO) No. 13817, “A Federal Strategy to Ensure Secure and Reliable Supplies of Critical Minerals,” the Secretary of the Interior, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, and in consultation with the heads of other relevant executive departments and agencies, was tasked with developing and submitting a draft list of minerals defined as “critical minerals” to the Federal Register within 60 days of the issue of the EO (December 20, 2017). Based on an analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey and other U.S. Government agencies, using multiple criteria, 35 minerals or mineral material groups have been identified that are currently (February 2018) considered critical. These include the following: aluminum (bauxite), antimony, arsenic, barite, beryllium, bismuth, cesium, chromium, cobalt, fluorspar, gallium, germanium, graphite (natural), hafnium, helium, indium, lithium, magnesium, manganese, niobium, platinum group metals, potash, rare earth elements group, rhenium, rubidium, scandium, strontium, tantalum, tellurium, tin, titanium, tungsten, uranium, vanadium, and zirconium. The categorization of minerals as critical may change during the course of the review process and is thus provisional.
Pests and invasive species have been defined as any organism that can have real or perceived adverse effects on operations, or the well-being of personnel, native plants, animals, their environment and ecosystem processes; attack or damage real property, supplies, equipment, or are otherwise undesirable (paraphrased from many sources including 53 Federal Register [FR] 15975, May 4, 1988, as amended at 78 FR 13507, February 28, 2013). Biosecurity programs and pest management plans can be developed and implemented with the goals of preventing the arrival of or eradication or control of pests and invasive species to reduce the potential for adverse effects. Such plans have been developed for Wake Atoll (U.S. Air Force, unpub. data 2017). Periodic plan reviews are an integral step for evaluating plan efficacy and updating plans with new information for improving plan effectiveness. This report summarizes an evaluation of past, current, and potential biosecurity and pest management for Wake with the intent this information can be used for updating existing plans. This document was prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Air Force (USAF) and surveys were performed for the 611th Civil Engineer Squadron Natural Resources Program ACES PROJECT no. YGFZ17002 under agreement number F2MUAA7116GW01 between the USAF and the U.S. Geological Survey’s Western Ecological Research Center (USGS-WERC).
As a result of recommendations several years ago from the National Academy of Sciences, the University of Oklahoma, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the U.S. Geological Survey has embarked upon a program of research and development to provide the technological insights needed for its regulatory operations offshore—operations which provide assurances to the public for safety and for the prevention of pollution in oil and gas drilling and production. These clear objectives are, therefore, those of the research program, not the economics of operations, which are of concern to industry. The Program is a contract research program and is an integral part of the Conservation Division. It is a focal point for deriving possible solutions from the university community, private industry, and the Federal laboratory system for identified offshore operational problems. This vast interdisciplinary body of science and technology provides the kind of research needed by the Division in its Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) operations which involve such problematic areas as structural dynamics, fluid flow, and geotechnology. The Program encourages innovation and creativity which can be accomplished only by talented scientists and engineers who are dedicated to man's endeavor to make breakthroughs in science and technology. Because the Division's mission is operational, in a sense like the U.S. Navy, the R&D Program must progress in a timely manner even though technological advances cannot really be scheduled. As the Navy's Office of Naval Research (ONR) has so successfully coped with the seeming dichotomy of anticipating the occurrence of innovations, so must the Conservation Division. Thus, USGS, like ONR, makes use of the unsolicited proposal and the best effort contract to accomplish its objectives. Good science and technology can only be accomplished when several variables converge: a talented investigator doing his own research, which happens to coincide with our needs, availability of resources, time scales, etc. Our task is to "beat the bushes" so that these people come to us with their innovative ideas and concepts. They have done so by learning of our interests through announcements of the Program in the Federal Register, reading reports which emanate from the Program, and by attending our seminars.
Accurate maps of the wildland–urban interface (WUI) are critical for the development of effective land management policies, conducting risk assessments, and the mitigation of wildfire risk. Most WUI maps identify areas at risk from wildfire by overlaying coarse-scale housing data with land cover or vegetation data. However, it is unclear how well the current WUI mapping methods capture the patterns of building loss. We quantified the building loss in WUI disasters, and then compared how well census-based and point-based WUI maps captured the building loss. We examined the building loss in both WUI and non-WUI land-use types, and in relation to the core components of the United States Federal Register WUI definition: housing density, vegetation cover, and proximity to large patches of wildland vegetation. We used building location data from 70 large fires in the conterminous United States, which cumulatively destroyed 54,000 buildings from 2000 through to 2018. We found that: (1) 86% and 97% of the building loss occurred in areas designated as WUI using the census-based and point-based methods, respectively; (2) 95% and 100% of all of the losses occurred within 100 m and 850 m of wildland vegetation, respectively; and (3) WUI components were the most predictive of building loss when measured at fine scales.
The contents of this Annual Report summarize results of monitoring and research from the 2006 field season. The report also contains a summary of nuisance grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos horribilis ) management actions. The Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team (IGBST) continues to work on issues associated with counts of unduplicated females with cubs-of- the-year (COY). These counts are used to establish a minimum population size, which is then used to establish mortality thresholds for the Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 1993). After considerable delays due to programming issues, a computer program that defines the rule set used by Knight et al. (1995) to differentiate unique family groups was development and tested in 2005 and 2006. Simulations using observations of collared females with COY were randomly sampled to generate datasets of observations of random females with COY. These datasets were then run though the simulations program to test the accuracy of the rules. Data are currently being summarized. This project has been completed and a manuscript was submitted to the Journal of Wildlife Management. The grizzly bear recovery plan (USFWS 1993) established human-caused mortality quotas. We used the latest information on reproduction and survival to estimate population trajectory in the same simulation model originally used by Harris (1984). A Wildlife Monographs was published in 2006. Additionally, the study team, in cooperation with several quantitative experts, reassessed how population size is indexed and how sustainable mortality rates are established. A draft report was presented to the Yellowstone Ecosystem Subcommittee in spring 2005. It was published as part of the USFWS Delisting Rule (Federal Register Vol. 70, No. 221, Nov. 17, 2005, 69853–69884) and subjected to public comment. This workshop document can be found at http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/grizzly/yellowstone.htm. During the summer of 2006, a second workshop was held to address public comment and professional peer review. The result of this workshop was a supplement to the 2005 workshop document. This supplement can be found at http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/grizzly/yellowstone.htm under the link Revised Methods to Estimate Population Size and Sustainable Mortality Limits. Results of those estimates are provided in Appendix A. Our project addressing the potential application of stable isotopes and trace elements to quantify consumption rates of whitebark pine ( Pinus albicaulis ) and cutthroat trout ( Oncorhynchus clarki ) by grizzly bears was completed. Our manuscript on consumption rates of whitebark pine was published in the Canadian Journal of Zoology 81:763-770. Results of the mercury studies were also published in the Canadian Journal of Zoology 82:493–501. Copies can be found on the IGBST website http://www.nrmsc.usgs.gov/research/igbst-home.htm. Based upon this work, we submitted a proposal to analyze all historic tissue samples from grizzly bears in the ecosystem. That proposal was funded and samples have been sent to a lab for isotopic analysis. We hope to have those results in early 2008. Results of DNA hair snaring work conducted on Yellowstone Lake were submitted and published in the Journal Ursus (Haroldson et al. 2005). Results of this study conducted from 1997–2000 showed a decline in fish use by grizzly bears when compared to earlier work conducted by Reinhart (1990) in 1985–1987. As a consequence, the IGBST submitted a proposal to the National Park Service and received 3 years funding to repeat that work. This project began in 2007. There are 2 graduate students and several field technicians working on the program. We completed the final field season in Grand Teton National Park evaluating habitat use both temporally and spatially between grizzly and black bears ( Ursus americanus ). We continue to use GPS technology that incorporates a spread spectrum communication system. Spread spectrum allows for transfer of stored GPS locations from the collar to a remote receiving station. Results of the 2006 field season are reported here. We plan to complete the final report in late 2007. We continued to monitor the health of whitebark pine in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) in cooperation with the Greater Yellowstone Whitebark Pine Monitoring Working Group. A summary of the 2006 monitoring is also presented (Appendix B). The IGBST uses counts of winter-killed ungulates to index spring carcass abundance for grizzly bears. Likewise, we use wier counts and stream surveys to index cutthroat trout abundance. We ask Dr. Steve Cherry, Department of Mathematical Sciences, Montana State University-Bozeman, to review the protocols and make recommendations for improving them. That review and recommendations are presented in Appendix C. Finally, the state of Wyoming, following recommendations from the Yellowstone Ecosystem Subcommittee and the IGBST, launched the Bear Wise Community Effort. The focus is to minimize human/bear conflicts, minimize human-caused bear mortalities associated with conflicts, and safeguard the human community. Results of these efforts are detailed in Appendix D. The annual reports of the IGBST summarize annual data collection. Because additional information can be obtained after publication, data summaries are subject to change. For that reason, data analyses and summaries presented in this report supersede all previously published data. The study area and sampling techniques are reported by Blanchard (1985), Mattson et al. (1991 a), and Haroldson et al. (1998).
On April 2-3, 2005, heavy rain moved into southern New York and delivered rainfall amounts that ranged from about 2 in. to almost 6 in. within a 36-hour period. Significant flooding occurred on many small streams and tributaries in the area, and extensive flooding occurred on the Esopus and Roundout Creeks in Ulster and Greene Counties, New York. The flooding damaged many homes, caused millions of dollars worth of damage, and forced hundreds of residents to evacuate their homes. A total of 20 New York counties were declared Federal disaster areas. Disaster recovery assistance for those people affected stands at almost $35 million, according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, as more than 3,400 New Yorkers registered for Federal aid. U.S. Geological Survey stream-gaging stations on the Esopus Creek above the Ashokan Reservoir at Allaben, N.Y., and below the Ashokan Reservoir at Mount Marion, N.Y., each recorded a new record maximum water-surface elevation and discharge for the respective periods of record as a result of this storm. The peak water-surface elevation and discharge recorded during the April 2-3, 2005, storm at the U.S. Geological Survey stream-gaging station on the Esopus Creek at Cold Brook, N.Y. were the third highest elevation and discharge since the station was put into operation in 1914. Most of the study sites along the Esopus Creek indicated water-surface elevations near the 50-year flood elevations, as documented in flood-insurance studies by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Heavy rain on April 2-3, 2005 produced rainfall amounts of 3 inches to almost 6 inches within a 36-hour period throughout the Delaware River basin. Major flooding occurred in the East and West Branches of the Delaware River and their tributaries, the main stem of the Delaware River and the Neversink River, a major tributary to the Delaware River. The resultant flooding damaged hundreds of homes, caused millions of dollars in damage to infrastructure in Orange and Sullivan Counties, and forced more than 1,000 residents to evacuate their homes. A total of 20 New York counties were declared Federal disaster areas. Some of the most extensive flooding occurred along the Neversink and Delaware Rivers in Orange and Sullivan Counties, New York. Disaster recovery assistance from the April 2005 flooding in New York stood at almost $35 million in 2005, at which time more than 3,400 New Yorkers had registered for Federal aid. All U.S. Geological Survey stream-gaging stations on the Neversink River below the Neversink Reservoir recorded peak water-surface elevations higher than those recorded during the September 2004 flooding. Peak water-surface elevations at some study sites on the Neversink River exceeded the 500-year flood elevation as documented in flood-insurance studies by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Flood peaks at some long-term U.S. Geological Survey stream-gaging stations were the highest ever recorded. Several U.S. Geological Survey stream-gaging stations on the Delaware River also recorded peak water-surface elevations that exceeded those recorded during the September 2004 flooding.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
No abstract available.