SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Reclamation Sciences”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2023

Evaluating the influence of the Forestry Reclamation Approach on throughfall quantity in eastern Kentucky

The Appalachian Region is a rich forested ecosystem that has been impacted by coal mining. The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 was enacted to resolve many of the environmental problems caused by surface mining. Reclamation practices resulted in excessive soil compaction and use of nonnative grasses and shrubs that have altered hydrologic processes. The Forestry Reclamation Approach (FRA) is a best practice for reestablishing forested ecosystems on mined lands in Appalachia. This project evaluated precipitation throughfall in reforested 10- and 20-year-old FRA sites and unmined 100-year-old forest stands as a metric for evaluating the return of forest hydrologic function after reclamation. Stands of coniferous and deciduous trees were evaluated independently for each age class. Throughfall rates were significantly impacted by tree type and age. Throughfall in coniferous trees was less than in deciduous trees, and throughfall in the 10-year-old deciduous trees tended to be highest. Throughfall was also significantly impacted by storm characteristics. Higher rainfall depth and longer duration resulted in significantly larger throughfall depths under both coniferous and deciduous stands, whereas increased intensity increased throughfall depths for the 10- and 100-year-old plots, but not for the 20-year-old plots. As canopy closure occurs in young FRA forests, throughfall rates resemble those reported for young, naturally regenerating forests in the region. Results may help guide management of forested watershed strategies to reduce surface runoff and local flooding on reclaimed surface mined lands.

Kentucky↗

USGS2024

Using the TSS-RESTREND methodology to diagnose post-reclamation vegetation trends on the western slope of Colorado

We evaluated the use of the time series segmented residual trends (TSS-RESTREND) methodology to analyze plant community trends after oil and gas reclamation. We focused on reclaimed well pads managed by the Bureau of Land Management in northwestern Colorado. We assessed whether TSS-RESTREND could detect postreclamation changes in a plant community and if such changes corresponded with management actions. We used precipitation data and the greenness-to-cover index to calculate the residuals of the vegetation–precipitation relationship (VPR residuals). The VPR residuals represent plant community trends caused by disturbance or management actions and not by precipitation. We then used breaks for additive season and trend and the Chow test on the VPR residuals of each well pad to identify abrupt changes in plant community composition from 2000 to 2020. Afterward, we applied a segmented residual trend (RESTREND) analysis to the VPR residuals before and after an identified breakpoint or a singular RESTREND when no significant breakpoint was found to determine if reclamation had an effect on vegetation response to precipitation. We found a slight positive increase in VPR residuals over time since reclamation, indicating a more positive response to precipitation over time. In addition, well pads with lower aridity index values had a small positive trend in VPR residuals over time, suggesting the negative impact of aridity on plant community composition diminishes with increasing time since reclamation. To further understand the connection between management actions and outcomes, we compared findings from TSS-RESTREND with aerial imagery and well pad documentation. With this information, we categorized the well pads into six groups based on reclamation outcomes. This approach provided insights into the effects of management actions on recovery. Overall, TSS-RESTREND methodology can help identify changes in plant community composition over time, enhancing our understanding of plant community dynamics in these severely degraded areas.

Colorado↗

USGS2008

An exploration of Bureau of Reclamation approaches for managing conflict over diverging science

As a major institutional agent supplying Western water resources, the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) provides important leadership, technical, and financial resources in water management, serving as the West's "water broker" (Bowersox 2000; Pisani 2003). In recent years, growing numbers of constituencies using water and the over-allocation of water resources have contributed to conflict over the resource in the American West (National Research Council 2004). Although the conflicts arise from many sources, one common theme is that Reclamation managers often must make decisions about water use and allocation when scientific studies provide uncertain or competing recommendations. We conducted a preliminary study of Reclamation water managers and water scientists to try to understand the approaches or techniques they use or consider useful for dealing with scientific conflicts over water allocation and how these compare to techniques found in the relevant literature. We report the results of (1) an electronic survey of Reclamation senior managers and (2) a panel discussion amongst Reclamation senior managers as to the current institutional capabilities for managing diverging scientific findings in water dispute resolution processes. We conclude with a discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the different tools and techniques managers reported in the survey and in the panel discussion.

Technical Memorandum↗

USGS2012

Disputes over science and dispute resolution approaches - A survey of Bureau of Reclamation employees

Water resources in parts of the Western United States are over-allocated, which intensifies the pressure to support water management decisions with strong scientific evidence. Because scientific studies sometimes provide uncertain or competing results or recommendations, science can become a source of disputes during decision-making processes. The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) is an important water manager in the Western United States, and Reclamation decision processes are often contested by a variety of affected constituencies. We conducted a Web-based survey of Reclamation employees to determine (1) which types of disputes over science are occurring and how common they are, (2) which approaches have been used by Reclamation to try to resolve these different types of disputes, (3) how useful Reclamation employees find these approaches at resolving these types of disputes, (4) the final outcomes of these disputes and the decision-making processes that were hindered by the disputes over science, and (5) the potential usefulness of several different types of dispute resolution resources that Reclamation could provide for employees that become involved in disputes over science. The calculated minimum response rate for the survey was 59 percent. Twenty-five percent of respondents indicated that they had been involved in a dispute over science while working at Reclamation. Native species and species listed under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 were the most common issue types reported in these disputes over science. Survey respondents indicated that they used a variety of approaches to resolve disputes over science and rated most approaches as either neutral or somewhat helpful in these endeavors. Future research is needed to determine whether there are additional variables underlying these disputes that were not measured in this survey that may identify when dispute resolution methods are most effective, or whether resolving aspects of these disputes, such as differing interpretations of science, is very difficult or impossible regardless of the dispute resolution methods used.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2022

Gene flow and spatial population structure of Brook Trout in a large headwater stream network in Colorado

We studied gene flow of non-native Brook Trout Salvelinus fontinalis in a 60-km section of continuous stream network in the upper Cache la Poudre River basin, where a large-scale reclamation effort to restore federally threatened Greenback Cutthroat Trout Oncorhynchus clarkii stomias (GBCT) is taking place. This effort—the Poudre Headwaters Project—represents the most important recovery effort of the state fish of Colorado and could result in a fivefold increase in total occupied GBCT habitat. However, the reclamation area is currently dominated by non-native Brook Trout; key steps to ensure the success of the Poudre Headwaters Project include removing non-native Brook Trout and physically isolating the area from reinvasion. We examined existing genetic population structure in the reclamation area to provide science-based guidance for effective Brook Trout removal and subsequent GBCT reintroduction. During 2018 and 2019, tissue samples were collected from 23 sites in the Long Draw region. We genotyped 792 Brook Trout using 12 microsatellite loci to examine genetic population structure within the reclamation area. Our results show that fine-scale genetic population structure is present among sites (F ST = 0.038) and overall genetic diversity is comparable to previously published estimates throughout the native range of Brook Trout (H O = 0.610; HE = 0.618). Analysis of genetic differentiation among sites indicates that sites in the reclamation area may function as a metapopulation, with fine-scale genetic structure present among tributaries that are connected by gene flow. Understanding how the landscape influences connectivity and population persistence will provide sciencebased guidance for Brook Trout removal efforts and allow managers to release GBCT in stretches of key habitat that ensure the highest probability of reintroduction success.

Colorado↗

USGS2020

Bridging the research-management gap: Landscape ecology in practice on public lands in the western United States

The field of landscape ecology has grown and matured in recent decades, but incorporating landscape science into land management decisions remains challenging. Many lands in the western United States are federally owned and managed for multiple uses, including recreation, conservation, and energy development. We argue for stronger integration of landscape science into the management of these public lands. We open by outlining the relevance of landscape science for public land planning, management, and environmental effects analysis, including pertinent laws and policies. We identify challenges to integrating landscape science into public land management, including the multijurisdictional nature and complicated spatial pattern of public lands, the capacity of agencies to identify and fill landscape science needs, and public perceptions about the meaning of landscape approaches to management. We provide several recent examples related to landscape monitoring, restoration, reclamation, and conservation in which landscape science products were developed specifically to support decision-making. We close by highlighting three actions - elevating the importance of science-management partnerships dedicated to coproducing actionable landscape science products, identifying where landscape science could foster efficiencies in the land-use planning process, and developing scenario-based landscape models for shrublands - that could improve landscape science support for public land planners and managers.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New↗

USGS2024

Modeling the impacts of Glen Canyon Dam operations on Colorado River resources

At the time of this report, the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) is writing two supplemental Environmental Impact Statements (sEIS ) and a new Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that will analyze the effects of changing water flow out of Glen Canyon Dam (GCD) (U.S. Department of Interior, 2024). These actions have the potential to affect downstream resources, including threatened and endangered species, in the Grand Canyon. This report covers modeling support provided on the two sEIS by the USGS Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center (GCMRC; U.S. Geological Survey, Southwest Biological Science Center). The first sEIS (Interim Guidelines sEIS) modifies Reclamation’s 2007 Colorado River Interim Guidelines for Lower Basin Shortages and Coordinated Operations for Lake Powell and Lake Mead (USBR, 2007) that determines annual water releases from GCD based on inflow to Lake Powell, the power generating requirements of GCD, and relative lake levels of Lake Powell and Lake Mead. Drought conditions have lowered the level of Lake Powell and may require GCD to release less water than was analyzed in the Interim EIS (7-million-acre feet/year). The effect of less water released, as well as lower lake levels and associated water quality concerns, on downstream resources was not analyzed in the 2007 Interim Guidelines EIS. Reclamation requested GCMRC support to provide models predicting the effects to resources of water releases lower than 7M acre feet/year, including models predicting effects to threatened and endangered species for use in a Biological Assessment.

Report↗

USGS2008

USGS Workshop on Scientific Aspects of a Long-Term Experimental Plan for Glen Canyon Dam, April 10-11, 2007, Flagstaff, Arizona

Executive Summary Glen Canyon Dam is located in the lower reaches of Glen Canyon National Recreation Area on the Colorado River, approximately 15 miles upriver from Grand Canyon National Park (fig. 1). In 1992, Congress passed and the President signed into law the Grand Canyon Protection Act (GCPA; title XVIII, sec. 1801?1809, of Public Law 102-575), which seeks ?to protect, mitigate adverse impacts to, and improve the values for which Grand Canyon National Park and Glen Canyon National Recreation Area were established.? The Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program (GCDAMP) was implemented as a result of the 1996 Record of Decision on the Operation of Glen Canyon Dam Final Environmental Impact Statement to ensure that the primary mandate of the GCPA is met through advances in information and resources management (U.S. Department of the Interior, 1995). On November 3, 2006, the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) announced it would develop a long-term experimental plan environmental impact statement (LTEP EIS) for operational activities at Glen Canyon Dam and other management actions on the Colorado River. The purpose of the long-term experimental plan is twofold: (1) to increase the scientific understanding of the ecosystem and (2) to improve and protect important downstream resources. The proposed plan would implement a structured, longterm program of experimentation to include dam operations, potential modifications to Glen Canyon Dam intake structures, and other management actions such as removal of nonnative fish species. The development of the long-term experimental plan continues efforts begun by the GCDAMP to protect resources downstream of Glen Canyon Dam, including Grand Canyon, through adaptive management and scientific experimentation. The LTEP EIS will rely on the extensive scientific studies that have been undertaken as part of the adaptive management program by the U.S. Geological Survey?s (USGS) Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center (GCMRC), one of the four research stations within the USGS Southwest Biological Science Center. On April 10 and 11, 2007, at the behest of Reclamation, the GCMRC convened a workshop with scientific experts to identify one or more scientifically credible, long-term experimental options for Reclamation to consider for the LTEP EIS that would be consistent with the purpose and need for the plan. Workshop participants included government, academic, and private scientists with broad experience in the Colorado River in Grand Canyon and regulated rivers around the world. Resource managers and GCDAMP participants were also present on the second day of the workshop. In advance of the workshop, Reclamation and LTEP EIS cooperating agencies identified 14 core scientific questions. Workshop participants were asked to consider how proposed options would address these questions, which fall primarily into four areas: (1) conservation of endangered humpback chub (Gila cypha) and other high-priority biological resources, (2) conservation of sediment resources, (3) enhancement of recreational resources, and (4) preservation of cultural resources. A secondary objective of the workshop was the evaluation of four long-term experimental options developed by the GCDAMP Science Planning Group (SPG) (appendix B). The flow and nonflow treatments called for in the four experimental options were an important starting point for workshop discussions. At the beginning of the workshop, participants were provided with the final LTEP EIS scoping report prepared by Reclamation. Participants were also advised that Reclamation had committed to ?make every effortEto ensure that a new population of humpback chub is established in the mainstem or one or more of the tributaries within Grand Canyon? in the 1995 Operation of Glen Canyon Dam Final Environmental Impact Statement (U.S. Department of the Interior, 1995). This decision was consistent with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?s 1995 bi

Open-File Report↗

USGS2006

Application of municipal biosolids to dry-land wheat fields - A monitoring program near Deer Trail, Colorado (USA). A presentation for an international conference: "The Future of Agriculture: Science, Stewardship, and Sustainability", August 7-9, 2006, Sacramento, CA

Since late 1993, Metro Wastewater Reclamation District of Denver (Metro District), a large wastewater treatment plant in Denver, Colorado, has applied Grade I, Class B biosolids to about 52,000 acres of non-irrigated farmland and rangeland near Deer Trail, Colorado. In cooperation with the Metro District in 1993, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) began monitoring ground water at part of this site. In 1999, the USGS began a more comprehensive study of the entire site to address stakeholder concerns about the chemical effects of biosolids applications. This more comprehensive monitoring program has recently been extended through 2010. Monitoring components of the more comprehensive study included biosolids collected at the wastewater treatment plant, soil, crops, dust, alluvial and bedrock ground water, and stream bed sediment. Streams at the site are dry most of the year, so samples of stream bed sediment deposited after rain were used to indicate surface-water effects. This presentation will only address biosolids, soil, and crops. More information about these and the other monitoring components are presented in the literature (e.g., Yager and others, 2004a, b, c, d) and at the USGS Web site for the Deer Trail area studies at http://co.water.usgs.gov/projects/CO406/CO406.html. Priority parameters identified by the stakeholders for all monitoring components, included the total concentrations of nine trace elements (arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, and zinc), plutonium isotopes, and gross alpha and beta activity, regulated by Colorado for biosolids to be used as an agricultural soil amendment. Nitrogen and chromium also were priority parameters for ground water and sediment components. In general, the objective of each component of the study was to determine whether concentrations of priority parameters (1) were higher than regulatory limits, (2) were increasing with time, or (3) were significantly higher in biosolids-applied areas than in a similar farmed area where biosolids were not applied. Where sufficient samples could be collected, statistical methods were used to evaluate effects. Rigorous quality assurance was included in all aspects of the study. The roles of hydrology and geology also were considered in the design, data collection, and interpretation phases of the study. Study results indicate that the chemistry of the biosolids from the Denver plant was consistent during 1999-2005, and total concentrations of regulated trace elements were consistently lower than the regulatory limits. Plutonium isotopes were not detected in the biosolids. Leach tests using deionized water to simulate natural precipitation indicate arsenic, molybdenum, and nickel were the most soluble priority parameters in the biosolids. Study results show no significant difference in concentrations of priority parameters between biosolids-applied soils and unamended soils where no biosolids were applied. However, biosolids were applied only twice during 1999-2003. The next soil sampling is not scheduled until 2010. To date concentrations of most of the priority parameters were not much greater in the biosolids than in natural soil from the sites. Therefore, many more biosolids applications would need to occur before biosolids effects on the soil priority constituents can be quantified. Leach tests using deionized water to simulate precipitation indicate that molybdenum and selenium were the priority parameters that were most soluble in both biosolids-applied soil and natural or unamended soil. Study results do not indicate significant differences in concentrations of priority parameters between crops grown in biosolids-applied areas and crops grown where no biosolids were applied. However, crops were grown only twice during 1999-2003, so only two crop samples could be collected. The wheat-grain elemental data collected during 1999-2003 for both biosolids-applied areas and unamended areas are similar

Open-File Report↗

USGS2011

Characterization of salinity and selenium loading and land-use change in Montrose Arroyo, western Colorado, from 1992 to 2010

Salinity and selenium are naturally occurring and perva-sive in the lower Gunnison River Basin of Colorado, includ-ing the watershed of Montrose Arroyo. Although some of the salinity and selenium loading in the Montrose Arroyo study area is from natural sources, additional loading has resulted from the introduction of intensive irrigation in the water-shed. With increasing land-use change and the conversion from irrigated agricultural to urban land, land managers and stakeholders need information about the long-term effects of land-use change on salinity and selenium loading. In response to the need to advance salinity and selenium science, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Bureau of Reclamation, Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum, and Colorado River Water Conservation District, developed a study to characterize salinity and selenium loading and how salinity and selenium sources may relate to land-use change in Montrose Arroyo. This report characterizes changes in salinity and selenium loading to Montrose Arroyo from March 1992 to February 2010 and the magnitude of land-use change between unirrigated desert, irrigated agricultural, and urban land-use/land-cover types, and discusses how the respective loads may relate to land-use change. Montrose Arroyo is an approximately 8-square-mile watershed in Montrose County in western Colorado. Salinity and selenium were studied in Montrose Arroyo in a 2001 study as part of a salinity- and selenium-control lateral project. The robust nature of the historical dataset indicated that Montrose Arroyo was a prime watershed for a follow-up study. Two sites from the 2001 study were used to monitor salinity and selenium loads in Montrose Arroyo in the follow-up study. Over the period of 2 water years and respective irrigation seasons (2008-2010), 27 water-quality samples were collected and streamflow measurements were made at the historical sites MA2 and MA4. Salinity and selenium concen-trations, loads, and streamflow were compared between the pre-lateral-project and post-growth periods and between the post-lateral-project and post-growth periods. No significant differences in streamflow, salinity (concen-tration and load), or selenium (concentration and load) were found at MA4 between the pre-lateral project and post-growth periods or between the post-lateral-project and post-growth periods. The statistical analysis indicated no significant dif-ferences in streamflow or salinity (both concentration and load) between the pre-lateral-project and post-growth periods or between the post-lateral-project and post-growth periods at MA2; however, selenium concentrations and loads were significantly greater between the pre-lateral-project and post-growth periods and between the post-lateral-project and post-growth periods at MA2. Land-use change between MA4 and MA2 may have contributed to the determined differences in selenium values, but the specific mechanisms causing the increases between periods are unknown. The size of the urbanized area in Montrose Arroyo was quantified for 1993, 2002, and 2009 by using a geographic information system (GIS) with imagery from the specified years. The greatest change in land use from 1993 to 2009 was the increase of urban land due to conversion from irrigated agricultural land. The conversion of previously unirrigated desert to urban land or irrigated agriculture could become more common if urbanization and development expands into the eastern part of the watershed because a majority of the un-urbanized land in eastern Montrose Arroyo is unirrigated desert. By applying GIS to the City of Montrose 2008 com-prehensive growth plan, it was estimated that approximately 786 acres of previously irrigated agricultural land will be converted to urban land and 689 acres of unirrigated desert will be converted to urban land under the plan scenario. New development on previously unirrigated land in shale areas would likely increase the potential for mobilization of sele-nium and salinity from new sources to Montrose Arroyo and the Lower Gunnison River Basin.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2019

Better approaches to managing drought in the American Southwest

The second in a series of USGS Southwest Region (SWR) “Science Exchange” annual workshops, focused on USGS drought science. The participants considered how extreme drought conditions are evolving in much of the American southwest, with an emphasis on integrated drought science planning at the USGS bureau and program levels. The increased need for interdisciplinary science to support resource-management decisions systems, was highlighted. The workshop brought together scientists and program managers from USGS with Bureau of Land Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, US Bureau of Reclamation and state water management departments. Key objectives of the workshop were to improve awareness of ongoing drought-science work within the region, highlight the capabilities of USGS-SWR science centers in drought science, and build new relationships to advance best approaches in drought science. Topics covered in presentations and demonstrations were broad-ranging and included monitoring for drought early warning; water use and water production associated with petroleum production; paleo perspectives on drought, and ecological consequences of drought to native fish.

Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union↗

USGS2006

History of the Fort Collins Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey

The U.S. Geological Survey’s Fort Collins Science Center ("the Center") has been a nucleus of research, technology development, and associated scientific activities within the Department of the Interior for more than 30 years. The Center’s historical activities are deeply rooted in federal biological resources research and its supporting disciplines, particularly as they relate to the needs of the U.S. Department of the Interior and its resource management agencies. The organizational framework and activities of the Center have changed and adapted over the years in response to shifts in the scientific issues and challenges facing the U.S. Department of the Interior and with the development of new strategies to meet these challenges. Thus, the history of the Center has been dynamic. The Center has been nested within the U.S. Geological Survey since 1996. From 1993 to 1996 the Center was a major unit of the National Biological Service (named the National Biological Survey at its inception). This was a period of great organizational flux. During that time the Center comprised multiple field stations and science functions that prior to 1993 had been scattered among the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the National Park Service, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In 1993, certain biological research components of these agencies were assigned to join with the National Ecology Research Center, formerly one of the major research and development hubs of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This was the year when biological resources research in the U.S. Department of the Interior was consolidated by the Secretary of the Interior, who in an April 1993 memo explaining his intentions wrote, "Our Department has, without doubt, the best biologists in the world." Soon after formation of the new agency, the Center was re-named the Midcontinent Ecological Science Center, reflecting its geographic location within the new Midcontinent administrative region of the National Biological Service (the other three original administrative regions were the eastern, western, and southern). The change in name to the Fort Collins Science Center took place in 2002, soon after the center moved to new facilities on the Colorado State University Natural Resources Research Campus. At various times during the period when it was part of the National Biological Service (1993–96), the Center served as the administrative and programmatic home base for a wide number of science activities in numerous Western states (table 1). This reflected the previous fragmentation of biological and related science efforts across resource management agencies in the U.S. Department of the Interior. The organization of the 2 Center within the National Biological Service was a manifestation of the desire of the Secretary of the Interior to consolidate its biological science activities in administratively independent entities that would ensure that the science retained its objectivity. Congress later recognized the need to maintain a hierarchical independence between biological science and resource management in the Department. However, Congress also saw that the U.S. Geological Survey, with its long history of objective science support to the nation in geology, water resources, geography, and remote sensing, was a suitable alternative home for these biological science functions. Thus, in 1996 Congress transferred the biological resources functions of the National Biological Service to the U.S. Geological Survey. Detailed overviews and opinions about the history and policy issues surrounding the formation and subsequent fate of the National Biological Service can be found elsewhere (for example Cohn, 1993, 2005; Kaufman, 1993; Kreeger, 1994; Pulliam, 1995, 1998a,b; Reichhardt, 1994; Wagner, 1999)

Open-File Report↗

USGS2010

Saltcedar (Tamarix spp.) and Russian Olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia) in the Western United States-A Report on the State of the Science

The Salt Cedar and Russian Olive Control Demonstration Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-320) directs the Department of the Interior to submit a report to Congress that includes an assessment of several issues surrounding these two nonnative trees, now dominant components of the vegetation along many rivers in the Western United States. This report was published in 2010 as a U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report (available online at http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2009/5247). The report was produced through a collaborative effort led by the Bureau of Reclamation and U.S. Geological Survey, with critical contributions from the U.S. Department of Agriculture and from university researchers. The document synthesizes the state of the science and key research needs on the following topics related to management of saltcedar (Tamarix spp.) and Russian olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia) in the Western United States: their distribution and abundance (extent); the potential for water savings associated with controlling these species; considerations related to wildlife use of saltcedar and Russian olive habitat and restored habitats; methods of control and removal; possible utilization of dead biomass following control and removal; and approaches and challenges associated with site revegetation or restoration. A concluding chapter discusses possible long-term management strategies, potentially useful field-demonstration projects, and a planning process for on-the-ground projects involving removal of saltcedar and Russian olive.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2009

Discussion on remote sensing for aquatic monitoring

The special session on Remote Sensing for Aquatic Resource Monitoring concluded with an expert panel discussion. Panel members were Jennifer Bountry (hydraulic engineer, Bureau of Reclamation), Mimi D’Iorio (GIS analyst and database manager, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), Russ Faux (president, Watershed Sciences, Inc.), Steve Lanigan (team leader, Aquatic and Riparian Effectiveness Monitoring Program, U.S. Forest Service), and Amar Nayegandhi (computer scientist, Jacobs Technology, contracted to U.S. Geological Survey). The panel was moderated by Ralph Haugerud (geologist, U.S. Geological Survey) and there were significant contributions from the audience. The dialogue is summarized below in question and answer format. This summary is followed by discussion of what we learned in the course of the special session and identification of some next steps for the Pacific Northwest aquatic monitoring community.

PNAMP Special Publication↗

USGS2024

Annotated bibliography of scientific research on Taeniatherum caput-medusae published from January 2010 to January 2022

Integrating recent scientific knowledge into management decisions supports effective natural resource management and can lead to better resource outcomes. However, finding and accessing scientific knowledge can be time consuming and costly. To assist in this process, the U.S. Geological Survey is creating a series of annotated bibliographies on topics of management concern for western lands. Previously published reports introduced a methodology for preparing annotated bibliographies to facilitate the integration of recent, peer-reviewed science into resource management decisions. Therefore, relevant text from those efforts is reproduced here to frame the presentation. Invasive annual grasses are widely distributed throughout the western United States and threaten native ecosystems by altering fire regimes, replacing native plants, and altering grazing patterns, often with tremendous associated costs. One invasive annual grass, Taeniatherum caput-medusae (hereafter, medusahead), was first documented in the United States in 1887 and has been identified as a species of management concern. Medusahead’s life history traits allow it to quickly and effectively dominate native plant communities, and it has already taken over millions of acres in western North America. Although medusahead can spread widely and disrupt ecosystem function, it has been studied less than other western invasive grass species. We compiled and summarized peer-reviewed journal articles, data products, and formal technical reports (such as U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Reports and U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Reports) on medusahead, published between January 2010 and January 2022. We first performed a systematic search of three reference databases and three government databases using the search phrase “medusahead” OR “medusa head” OR “ Taeniatherum caput-medusae ” OR “ Taeniatherum caputmedusae ” OR “ Taeniatherum asperum .” We refined the initial list of products by removing (1) duplicates, (2) products not written in English, (3) publications that were not focused on North America, (4) publications that were not published as research, data products, or scientific review articles in peer-reviewed journals or as formal technical reports, and (5) products for which medusahead was not a research focus, or the study did not present new data or findings about medusahead. We summarized each product using a consistent structure (background, objectives, methods, location, findings, and implications) and identified the management topics (for example, species and population characteristics; habitat; and control and management efforts) addressed by each product. We also noted which publications included new geospatial data. The review process for this annotated bibliography included an initial internal colleague review of each summary, requesting input on each summary from an author of the original publication, and a formal peer review. Our initial searches resulted in 4,245 total products, of which 211 met our criteria for inclusion. The most commonly addressed management topics addressed in products summarized in the annotated bibliography were as follows: nonnative invasive plants, weed management, site-scale habitat characteristics, habitat restoration or reclamation, and cultural management of weeds. All published bibliographies, including the online version of this bibliography, are available at the Science for Resource Managers ( https://apps.usgs.gov/science-for-resource-managers ). This database is searchable by topic, location, and year and includes links to each original publication. The studies compiled and summarized here may inform planning and management actions that seek to maintain and restore sagebrush landscapes and associated native species across the western United States.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2010

Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative Science and Management Workshop Proceedings, May 12-14, 2009, Laramie, Wyoming

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) hosted the second Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative (WLCI) Science and Management Workshop at the University of Wyoming Conference Center and Hilton Garden Inn on May 12, 13, and 14, 2009, in Laramie, Wyo. The workshop focused on six topics seen as relevant to ongoing WLCI science and management activities: mapping and modeling resources for decisionmaking; data information and management; fish and wildlife research; changing landscapes; monitoring; and reclamation and offsite mitigation. Panelists gave presentations on ongoing research in these six areas during plenary sessions followed by audience discussions. Three breakout groups focused on discussing wildlife, reclamation, and monitoring. Throughout the plenary sessions, audience discussions, and breakout groups, several needs were repeatedly emphasized by panelists and workshop participants: developing a conservation plan and identifying priority areas and species for conservation actions; gaining a deeper understanding of sagebrush ecology; identifying thresholds for wildlife that can be used to create an 'early warning system' for managers; continuing to collect basic data across the landscape; facilitating even greater communication and partnership across agencies and between scientists and land managers; and engaging proactively in understanding new changes on the landscape such as wind energy development and climate change. Detailed proceedings from the workshop are captured and summarized in this report.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2026

Recent scientific contributions by the U.S. Geological Survey in the San Francisco Bay and Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta Estuary

Introduction The San Francisco Bay and Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta Estuary (hereafter, Bay-Delta) is the largest estuary on the West Coast of the United States. The Bay-Delta covers more than 1,600 square miles and drains a watershed of more than 75,000 square miles, which is greater than 40 percent of California. The region surrounding the Bay-Delta is home to about 10 million people, and its habitats (fig. 1) support more than 800 plant and animal species. The waterways of the Bay-Delta are the central hub of California’s extensive freshwater delivery system, supplying water to more than 27 million Californians and 4 million acres of farmland in the Central Valley. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is the primary science agency of the U.S. Department of the Interior, providing a broad range of Earth, water, biological, and mapping data and expertise to inform natural resource management across the country. This fact sheet focuses on research conducted by the USGS in the Bay-Delta region, mostly within the past 5 years. The fact sheet is organized across five major themes: water flow and water quality, fish and wildlife, wetland restoration, invasive species, and hazards. In each of these areas, the USGS works closely with Federal, State, and local agencies; academia; and non-governmental organizations to provide objective, evidence-based science. The data and knowledge gained from USGS research and monitoring are publicly available and are routinely used by agencies, including the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Water Resources, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, California State Water Resources Control Board, Delta Stewardship Council, and many additional organizations and stakeholders to inform management of the Bay-Delta region and its resources.

California↗

USGS2017

Scientific monitoring plan in support of the selected alternative of the Glen Canyon Dam Long-Term Experimental and Management Plan

Introduction The purpose of this document is to describe a strategy by which monitoring and research data in the natural and social sciences will be collected, analyzed, and provided to the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), its bureaus, and to the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program (GCDAMP) in support of implementation of the Glen Canyon Dam Long-Term Experimental and Management Plan (LTEMP) (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2016a). The selected alternative identified in the LTEMP Record of Decision (ROD) (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2016b) describes various data collection, analysis, modeling, and interpretation efforts to be conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center (GCMRC), partner agencies, and cooperators that will inform decisions about operations of Glen Canyon Dam and management of downstream resources between 2017 and 2037, the performance period of the LTEMP. General data collection, analysis, modeling, and interpretation activities are described in this science plan, whereas specific monitoring and research activities and detailed study plans are to be described in the GCDAMP’s triennial work plans (TWPs) to be developed by the Bureau of Reclamation and GCMRC with input from partner agencies and cooperators during the LTEMP period, which are to be reviewed and recommended by the GCDAMP and approved by the Secretary of the Interior. The GCDAMP consists of several components, the primary committee being the Adaptive Management Work Group (AMWG). This Federal advisory committee is composed of 25 agencies and stakeholder groups and is chaired by the Secretary of the Interior’s designee. The AMWG makes recommendations to the Secretary of the Interior concerning operations of Glen Canyon Dam and other experimental management actions that are intended to fulfill some obligations of the Grand Canyon Protection Act of 1992. The Technical Work Group (TWG) is a subcommittee of the AMWG and provides technical advice to the AMWG. It is composed of technical and science representatives from the same agencies and stakeholder groups who serve on the AMWG. GCMRC is the primary science provider to the GCDAMP and also coordinates many aspects of the science performed by cooperators and partner agencies. The Science Advisors Program provides independent science reviews and advice at the request of the GCDAMP. The plan proposed here necessarily depends on (1) the protocol for decision-making and the requirements for scientific data reporting described in the LTEMP ROD, (2) the priorities of the GCDAMP as directed by the LTEMP ROD (see Department of the Interior, 2016b, section 6.1), (3) the priorities for monitoring and research in the conservation measures section of the Biological Opinion for the LTEMP (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2016b, LTEMP ROD attachment E), (4) the priorities for resource management and information needs established by Federal and State resource-management agencies within the GCDAMP, (5) scientific understanding about the linkage between the status of those resources and operations of Glen Canyon Dam, and (6) the need to resolve existing scientific uncertainties about the linkage between dam operations and the condition of resources. We note that resource-management prioritization is fundamentally a policy decision charged specifically to DOI for the Colorado River in Glen and Grand Canyons, as outlined most recently in the LTEMP ROD, and is not the responsibility of the GCMRC. However, it is the responsibility of the GCMRC to describe the nature of scientific understanding, the nature of scientific uncertainty, and the risk of making resourcemanagement decisions in the face of existing scientific uncertainty. The goals of science activities in the next 20 years are to inform operational decisions regarding Glen Canyon Dam operations described in the LTEMP ROD, resolve remaining scientific uncertainties, and to monitor resource trends that are affected entirely, or in part, by dam operations.

Open-File Report↗