Geology ReportsSearch

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Tourism Economics”

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

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

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

Assessing the impact of open-ocean and back-barrier shoreline change on Dauphin Island, Alabama, at multiple time scales over the last 75 years

Dauphin Island and Little Dauphin Island, collectively, make up a geomorphically complex barrier island system located along Alabama’s southern coast, separating Mississippi Sound from the Gulf of Mexico and Mobile Bay. The barrier island system provides numerous economical (tourism, fisheries) and natural (habitat for migratory birds, natural protection of inland and coastal areas from storms) benefits to the State of Alabama. The complex geomorphology of Dauphin Island is partly a response to temporal variations in the direction and magnitude of sediment transport along and across the barrier island system. In this report, we present open-ocean and back-barrier shoreline change rates at different time scales to evaluate the island’s dominant behavior (expansion or widening and contraction or narrowing) over the last 75 years. The spatial and temporal variability of barrier island width provides baseline and historical context for potential restoration alternatives being considered as part of the Alabama Barrier Island Restoration Feasibility Study. Open-ocean shorelines have eroded continuously over the last 75 years, with rates ranging from 1.5 to 4 meters per year. Back-barrier shorelines are less uniform than open-ocean shorelines, but are, on average, also eroding over the same period. Periods of back-barrier progradation are observed but generally occur during discrete, large altering events like hurricanes that overwash or breach narrow sections of the barrier island. Because both shorelines are eroding, the width of the island has decreased during the last 75 years. The section to the west of a breach that opened during Hurricanes Ivan and Katrina (known as Katrina Cut) exhibits a steady, rapid decrease in width while the section to the east of the breach has gone through periods of expansion and contraction and has only recently begun slowly narrowing. Although the recent trends indicate declining widths, the back-barrier progradation rates in this area were the highest compared to other time periods, which abated extreme narrowing caused by increased open-ocean shoreline erosion. These data and the interpreted results indicate that both short-term (annual) and long-term (decadal) cross-barrier sediment exchange is a key component of sustaining barrier island width. Therefore, any mechanisms that influence this exchange, whether from natural processes (overwash, breaching, or inlet dynamics) or human activities (development, post-storm recovery, restoration), should be considered when evaluating the long-term sustainability of barrier island systems.

Alabama

The importance of adjusting for trip purpose in regional economic analyses of tourist destinations

This paper investigates the empirical importance of distinguishing visitors and their expenditures by trip purpose when estimating the tourism effects of a national park on a local economy. Accounting for trip purpose is quite important when there are two or more nearby major attractions in the same geographical area. This applies to the author's case study of Grand Teton and Yellowstone National Parks in the State of Wyoming, and also to other areas, such as the State of Utah's Bryce and Zion National Parks or amusement parks in the Orlando area in Florida. The authors illustrate the various types of survey questions and methods for correcting for trip purpose. In the case study, it would be quite misleading to attribute all spending by visitors to Grand Teton National Park (GTNP) in the town of Jackson, Wyoming, solely to GTNP because this would overstate employment actually attributable to the park by 3,455 jobs, or 22%. In turn, this overestimates the dependence of jobs in the Jackson economy on GTNP by 15%, incorrectly estimating it at 75% rather than the sounder figure of 60% of total jobs.

Tourism Economics

Influences of high-flow events on a stream channel altered by construction of a highway bridge: A case study

Impacts of highway construction on streams in the central Appalachians are a growing concern as new roads are created to promote tourism and economic development in the area. Alterations to the streambed of a first-order stream, Sauerkraut Run, Hardy County, WV, during construction of a highway overpass included placement and removal of a temporary culvert, straightening and regrading of a section of stream channel, and armourment of a bank with a reinforced gravel berm. We surveyed longitudinal profiles and cross sections in a reference reach and the altered reach of Sauerkraut Run from 2003 through 2007 to measure physical changes in the streambed. During the four-year period, three high-flow events changed the streambed downstream of construction including channel widening and aggradation and then degradation of the streambed. Upstream of construction, at a reinforced gravel berm, bank erosion was documented. The reference section remained relatively unchanged. Knowledge gained by documenting channel changes in response to natural and anthropogenic variables can be useful for managers and engineers involved in highway construction projects.

West Virginia

Agri-tourism and rural outdoor recreation in the US: A framework for understanding economic and employment dynamics

Agri-tourism and rural outdoor recreation are positioned at an important intersection between agricultural, natural resource, economic development and rural issues. This chapter summarizes some of the important dynamics of these sectors, including the role of land use, regional drivers, motivations for farmers and travelers, and economic impacts. As a means to illustrate several key points, highlights of several case studies, papers and reports about rural outdoor and agricultural tourism are summarized. To conclude, a research agenda for those interested in the role of tourism to rural economies is framed.

Book chapter

Quality of life on the Colorado Plateau: A report to camera-survey collaborators in southeast Utah

What constitutes quality of life among community residents in southeastern and central Utah? What critical areas, elements, and special outdoor places are essential to quality of life in those areas? Answering these questions was the goal of this "quality-of-life" research collaboration in the Colorado Plateau region. Collaborators include the Utah Travel Council (UTC), Canyon Country Partnership, Utah State University, and the county governments of Carbon, Emery, Grand, San Juan, and Wayne counties. In recent years, the goal of the UTC has changed from simply encouraging tourism development to understanding the relationship between tourism and community quality of life. Elements of the new UTC mission include: “make Utah a better place to live by increasing the economic contribution of tourism,” and “protect base resources and maintain quality of life for residents and visitors alike” (Utah Division of Travel Development, 1997). The Social, Economic, and Institutional Analysis Section [SEIAS]/ Midcontinent Ecological Science Center/U.S. Geological Survey conducted this research in late spring through winter of 1997 in an effort to answer those questions posed by the collaboration. This report provides an overview of the research and presents summary results.

Utah

Shifting currents: Progress, setbacks, and shifts in policy and practice

The Wisconsin Academy’s initial Waters of Wisconsin project (WOW I) facilitated a statewide conversation between 2000 and 2003 around one main question: How can we ensure healthy aquatic ecosystems and clean, abundant water supplies for tomorrow’s Wisconsin? Robust participation in this conversation underscored the important role citizens have in the stewardship of our waters, and we found enthusiastic support for farsighted policies—based on sound science—to manage our water legacy. Overall, we found that Wisconsinites cherish water and see our waters as essential to our way of life in Wisconsin. Nationally, our state ranks 25th in land area but has the fourth-highest area covered by water. Wisconsin is 20th in population but is second only to Florida in the number of fishing licenses sold each year. Clean water supports billions of dollars’ worth of economic activity through tourism, agriculture, and industry. From the Northwoods cabin to the Port of Milwaukee to the Wisconsin Dells, water shapes our state’s identity. Our tradition of safeguarding Wisconsin’s waters is grounded in values such as responsibility to family and future generations, respect for land and wildlife, protecting public health and safety, and caring for water as a common good, as articulated in the state’s Public Trust Doctrine (see page 9). These deeply held values have also shaped a conservation ethic, and its legacy has served many generations who depend upon and enjoy the waters of the state. Through WOW I, we identified the need to overcome the institutional and disciplinary separation of science, policy, and management protocols through a more integrated approach to water management. WOW also affirmed that the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and other public agencies play a critical role in sound scientific application, citizen participation, and the practical implementation of policy while balancing public and private interests toward the goal of a clean water future. More than a decade has passed since our first statewide WOW conversation and the report that captured recommendations from its participants: Waters of Wisconsin: The Future of Our Aquatic Ecosystems and Resources. Drawing from a diverse and growing set of stakeholders from across the state, the Wisconsin Academy initiated a new conversation in 2012 (known as WOW II) to assess progress in regard to our 2003 recommendations. We also sought to review the status of waters in Wisconsin today. The result of this renewed conversation is Shifting Currents: Progress, Setbacks, and Shifts in Policy and Practice. The new report assesses progress in brief, and explores in greater depth the continuing and emerging challenges to water quality, supply, and aquatic ecosystems in Wisconsin. In this report, we first review the context and frameworks for public decision-making about water and then examine some of the root causes—or “drivers”—and ecological stressors that underlie many of the symptoms we see in the form of pollution or ecosystem degradation in Wisconsin. This is followed by a summary of current water issues, many of which had been identified in the 2003 report and remain relevant today. We examine progress since 2003 but also setbacks, and discuss issues that we are likely to continue to face in the coming decades, including controlling agricultural runoff, mitigating climate change and grappling with its effects on the state’s waters, protecting groundwater from bacterial contamination and other pollutants, and preventing groundwater depletion. We also attempt to anticipate issues on the horizon. We offer a deeper look at some particular challenges, such as phosphorus pollution and groundwater contamination. We then consider the current decision-making framework and how it is shaping our capacity to respond to water challenges in Wisconsin. Finally, we offer recommendations and identify opportunities to safeguard Wisconsin’s waters in the decades ahead. From its inception, the Wisconsin Academy’s Waters of Wisconsin Initiative has brought together a diverse community of experts from across the state and from varied fields and areas of interest, to address challenges and seize opportunities related to our precious waters. We have done so as a matter of both principle and practical reality: the state of our waters reflects the ways we interact not only with them, but also with one another and our institutions. The WOW Initiative has aimed to provide guidance for Wisconsin citizens in sustaining the health of our aquatic ecosystems and the resilience of our water supplies over the long term.

Report

Council Monitoring and Assessment Program (CMAP): User guide for the Gulf Coast Monitoring and Assessment Portal

The Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities, and Revived Economies of the Gulf Coast States Act (RESTORE Act Final Rule at 31 C.F.R. Part 34) was signed into law on July 6, 2012. The RESTORE Act calls for a regional approach to restoring the long-term health of the valuable natural ecosystem and economy of the Gulf Coast region. The RESTORE Act dedicates 80 percent of civil and administrative penalties paid under the Clean Water Act, after the date of enactment, by the responsible parties in connection with the Deepwater Horizon oil spill to the Gulf Coast Restoration Trust Fund (Trust Fund) for ecosystem restoration, economic recovery, and tourism promotion in the Gulf Coast region. In addition to creating the Trust Fund, the RESTORE Act established the Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council (RESTORE Council or Council). The Council includes the Governors of the states of Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas, the Secretaries of the U.S. Departments of Agriculture, the Army, Commerce, Homeland Security, and the Interior, and the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The Council plays a key role in developing strategies and implementing projects that help ensure the Gulf of Mexico’s natural resources are sustainable and available for future generations. The Council Monitoring and Assessment Program (CMAP) was approved as a Gulf-wide investment by the Council in the 2015 Initial Funded Priorities List and is administered jointly by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Funded activities include the organization of basic, foundational components for a Gulf-wide monitoring network to measure the efficacy of investments in Gulf restoration by the Council. The program, in coordination with the Gulf of Mexico Alliance (GOMA) and through collaboration with the Gulf States, federal and local partners, academia, non-governmental organizations, and business and industry, has leveraged existing resources, capacities, and expertise and built on existing monitoring programs and their data.

Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi,

A spatial analysis of cultural ecosystem service valuation by regional stakeholders in Florida: a coastal application of the social values for ecosystem services (SolVES) tool

Livelihoods and lifestyles of people throughout the world depend on essential goods and services provided by marine and coastal ecosystems. However, as societal demand increases and available ocean and coastal space diminish, better methods are needed to spatially and temporally allocate ocean and coastal activities such as shipping, energy production, tourism, and fishing. While economic valuation is an important mechanism for doing so, cultural ecosystem services often do not lend themselves to this method. Researchers from the U.S. Geological Survey are working collaboratively with the Florida Sea Grant College Program to map nonmonetary values of cultural ecosystem services for a pilot area (Sarasota Bay) in the Gulf of Mexico. The research seeks to close knowledge gaps about the attitudes and perceptions, or nonmonetary values, held by coastal residents toward cultural ecosystem services, and to adapt related, terrestrial-based research methods to a coastal setting. A critical goal is to integrate research results with coastal and marine spatial planning applications, thus making them relevant to coastal planners and managers in their daily efforts to sustainably manage coastal resources. Using information about the attitudes and preferences of people toward places and uses in the landscape, collected from value and preference surveys, the USGS SolVES 2.0 tool will provide quantitative models to relate social values, or perceived nonmonetary values, assigned to locations by survey respondents with the underlying environmental characteristics of those same locations. Project results will increase scientific and geographic knowledge of how Sarasota Bay residents value their area’s cultural ecosystem services.

Florida

Long- versus short-term changes in seafloor elevation and volume of the Upper Florida Keys Reef Tract: 1935–2002 and 2002–2016

Coral reefs provide immense ecosystem and economic value, supporting biodiversity, fisheries, tourism, and coastal protection worth billions annually. However, widespread degradation from thermal stress, storms, disease, and human impacts has caused significant coral cover and reef structure loss, increasing coastal vulnerability and economic risks. While coral loss is well-documented, degradation of underlying reef infrastructure and surrounding seafloor changes remain poorly understood. This study addresses this knowledge gap by quantifying seafloor elevation and volume changes across 234.2 km 2 of the Upper Florida Keys (UFK) reef tract using historical bathymetric and modern lidar (light detection and ranging) data collected from two periods with distinctly different disturbance regimes: 1935–2002 (frequent storms and major coral loss) and 2002–2016 (few storms and persistently low coral cover). Analysis of over 25,000 data points revealed substantial elevation and volume loss during 1935–2002 (−0.1 ± 0.8 m; 13.6 × 10 6 m 3 net loss), shifting to minimal gains by 2002–2016 (0.0 ± 0.3 m; 1.6 × 10 6 m 3 net gain). Despite this shift, benthic cover data showed continued declines in stony coral, with increases in macroalgae and octocorals, indicating that limited reef accretion persists even with reduced storm activity. Spatial analyses highlighted variable accretion and erosion patterns across habitats and subregions, underscoring the limitations of localized measurements for ecosystem-wide assessments. Our findings demonstrate the value of integrating historical and modern datasets for regional reef monitoring, establishing baselines for restoration planning, and emphasizing the need for continued high-resolution monitoring to guide adaptive management amid ongoing environmental change.

Florida

Impacts of climate change on ecosystem services

Key Findings By 2050, climate change will triple the fraction of counties in the U.S. that are at high or extremely high risk of outstripping their water supplies (from 10 percent to 32 percent). The most at risk areas in the U.S. are the West, Southwest and Great Plains regions. Regulation of drinking water quality will be strained as high rainfall and river discharge conditions may lead to higher levels of nitrogen in rivers and greater risk of waterborne disease outbreaks. Climate change will have uneven effects on timber production across the U.S. Recent increases in tree mortality due to disease and pests, and the intensity of fires and area burned will continue to destroy productive forests. On the other hand, in some regions climate change is expected to boost overall forest productivity due to longer growing seasons. There is a better than 50 percent chance that climate change will overwhelm the ability of natural systems to mitigate the harm to people resulting from extreme weather events (such as heat waves, heavy rains, and drought). Vulnerability of people and property in coastal areas is highly likely to increase dramatically – due to the effects of sea-level rise, storm surge, and the loss of habitats that provide protection from flooding and erosion. The areas at greatest risk to coastal hazards in the U.S. are the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. The human communities most vulnerable to climate-related increases in coastal hazards are the elderly and the poor who are less able to respond quickly before and during hazards and to respond over the long term through relocation. Changes in abundance and ranges of commercially important marine fish are highly likely to result in loss of some local fisheries, and increases in value for others if fishing communities and management practices can adapt. In recreation and tourism, the greatest negative climate impacts will continue to be felt in winter sports and beach recreation (due to coastal erosion). Other forms of recreation are highly likely to increase due to better weather, leading to a redistribution of the industry and its economic impacts, with visitors and tourism dollars shifting away from some communities in favor of others. Supporting, regulating, and provisioning ecosystem services all contribute to food security in the United States, and the fate of the nation’s food production are very likely to depend on the interplay of these services and how the agriculture and fishery sectors respond to climate stresses.

Book chapter

U.S. Geological Survey Chesapeake science strategy, 2015-2025—Informing ecosystem management of America’s largest estuary

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has the critical role of providing scientific information to improve the understanding and management of the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem. The USGS works with Federal, State, and academic science partners to provide research and monitoring, and communicate results of these activities to enhance ecosystem management for both the Chesapeake and other National ecosystems. The USGS Chesapeake Science Strategy was prepared to guide science activities to address the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement (2014–2025), to support the Department of the Interior (DOI) involvement in the Bay restoration efforts, and align with the USGS Mission Area (MA) Science strategies. The Chesapeake Bay is our Nation’s largest estuary, and provides critical goods and services to the people, fish, and wildlife that use the 64,000-square-mile watershed. The Chesapeake Bay watershed contains over 3,600 species of fish, wildlife, and plants and provides spawning grounds for many ecologically and economically important species including striped bass and blue crabs. The Bay watershed lies in the heart of the Atlantic Flyway and has 29 species of waterfowl, about 1 million of which winter in the region. The size of the Chesapeake seafood harvest is third in the Nation, only behind the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Along with agricultural production, tourism, and recreation, the estimated economic value of the services from the Chesapeake Bay watershed is about $100 billion annually. However, the health of the Bay ecosystem began to decline at the beginning of the 20th century due to overfishing and increasing human population and associated land change. The Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) is the Federal-State cooperative effort that started in 1983 to restore the Bay and watershed. Given the ecological and economic importance of the Chesapeake ecosystem, President Obama issued an Executive Order (EO) in 2009 for increased Federal leadership in the CBP to enhance the pace of restoration, and the supporting strategy was released in 2010. The EO directed the Federal Government, including the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), represented by the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS), and the USGS, to expand its efforts and increase leadership to restore the Bay and its watershed. The USGS and other Federal agencies expanded their activities in 2011 to meet the President’s Chesapeake EO. Since the EO was released, there have been several important changes in the USGS, DOI, and the CBP including: (1) the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement, (2) increased DOI leadership in the CBP, and (3) the release of the USGS MA science strategies. The EO strategy served as a foundation for the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement that was signed in 2014 by the CBP Partners, and has goals and outcomes to be met by 2025. The USGS developed the Chesapeake Science Strategy to guide our activities to address the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement, DOI leadership in the CBP, and USGS MA strategies. Improving the understanding of fish and wildlife population and health, and the factors affecting their condition is the emphasis of the Strategy. The science focuses on documenting the critical ecosystem connections in the Chesapeake, and providing implications to enhance decision making for restoration and conservation activities. The revised Strategy has four themes that address 7 of the 10 goals in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement: Enhance science to support restoration, and conservation of fish, wildlife, and critical habitats. Characterize and explain changes in water quality, and its effect on freshwater and estuarine ecosystems. Assess and forecast effects of climate and land change on ecosystem conditions. Synthesize and provide information to support ecosystem management. The structure and function of biological communities of the Bay and its watershed are extremely complex and are affected by a variety of stressors and conditions. To better define the issues being addressed, the USGS has developed cross-cutting questions that define some of the most important scientific challenges where multiple disciplines and collaborators are needed to address an issue. The initial questions include: How do land and climate changes affect freshwater fish communities, health, and habitats? What are the relations among land use, water quality, contaminants, and the health of fish and wildlife? How are coastal wetlands and their carrying capacity for waterbirds affected by changing climate and land use? How is the water quality of rivers and estuaries responding to restoration actions, and changing land use? What are some of the best opportunities for management actions to benefit multiple restoration outcomes?

Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virgin

From ridge to reef—linking erosion and changing watersheds to impacts on the coral reef ecosystems of Hawai‘i and the Pacific Ocean

Coral reef ecosystems are threatened by unprecedented watershed changes in the United States and worldwide. These ecosystems sustain fishing and tourism industries essential to the economic survival of many communities. Sediment, nutrients, and pollutants from watersheds are increasingly transported to coastal waters, where these contaminants damage corals. Although pollution from watersheds is one of many factors threatening coral survival, it is one that local people can have a profound influence on. U.S. Geological Survey scientists are using mapping, monitoring, and computer modeling to better forecast the effects of watershed changes on reef health. Working with communities in Hawai‘i and on other U.S. islands in the Pacific, they are helping to provide the science needed to make informed decisions on watershed and coral reef management.

Hawai'i

South Dakota and Landsat

Few States derive as much of their social and economic well-being from the land as South Dakota. Agriculture is the State’s primary industry. Hunting, fishing, tourism, mining, and hydroelectric power are also important economic and cultural drivers. Data from the U.S. Geological Survey Landsat program, archived at the U.S. Geological Survey Earth Resources Observation and Science Center just outside Sioux Falls, South Dakota, has long been a boon to the monitoring, mapping, and management of the State’s land resources.

South Dakota

Economic impacts of the SAFRR tsunami scenario in California: Chapter H in The SAFRR (Science Application for Risk Reduction) Tsunami Scenario

This study evaluates the hypothetical economic impacts of the SAFRR (Science Application for Risk Reduction) tsunami scenario to the California economy. The SAFRR scenario simulates a tsunami generated by a hypothetical magnitude 9.1 earthquake that occurs offshore of the Alaska Peninsula (Kirby and others, 2013). Economic impacts are measured by the estimated reduction in California’s gross domestic product (GDP), the standard economic measure of the total value of goods and services produced. Economic impacts are derived from the physical damages from the tsunami as described by Porter and others (2013). The principal physical damages that result in disruption of the California economy are (1) about $100 million in damages to the twin Ports of Los Angeles (POLA) and Long Beach (POLB), (2) about $700 million in damages to marinas, and (3) about $2.5 billion in damages to buildings and contents (properties) in the tsunami inundation zone on the California coast. The study of economic impacts does not include the impacts from damages to roads, bridges, railroads, and agricultural production or fires in fuel storage facilities because these damages will be minimal with respect to the California economy. The economic impacts of damage to other California ports are not included in this study because detailed evaluation of the physical damage to these ports was not available in time for this report. The analysis of economic impacts is accomplished in several steps. First, estimates are made for the direct economic impacts that result in immediate business interruption losses in individual sectors of the economy due to physical damage to facilities or to disruption of the flow of production units (commodities necessary for production). Second, the total economic impacts (consisting of both direct and indirect effects) are measured by including the general equilibrium (essentially quantity and price multiplier effects) of lost production in other sectors by ripple effects upstream and downstream along the supply chain. An appropriate measure of the economic impacts on the California economy for the SAFRR tsunami scenario is the reduction in GDP. The economic impacts are first calculated without resilience, the ability of the economy to adjust to disruptions in ways that mute potential negative impacts. There are many types of resilience, including using existing inventories of materials, using unused capacity, conserving inputs, substituting for disrupted supplies, recapturing production after the disruption is restored, and many others. A method for estimating resilience, identified in the port system and sectors affected by property damages, is applied to indicate potential reductions of direct and total economic impacts. In this SAFRR tsunami scenario analysis of economic impacts to California, we implement established techniques used to model the economic impacts for two previous U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scenarios: the southern California Shakeout earthquake (Rose and others, 2011) and the California ARkStorm severe winter storm (Sue Wing and others, written commun., 2013). For the SAFRR tsunami scenario, we reviewed the relevant studies that assess economic impacts from previous tsunami events affecting California and elsewhere and estimate the economic impacts of potential tsunami and other threats to POLA and POLB. To our knowledge, assessment of impacts to the California economy from distant source tsunamis does not exist. Previous tsunamis, including those from the 1960 Chile earthquake, the 1964 Alaska earthquake, the 2008 Chile earthquake and the 2011 Japan earthquake, had only relatively minor or very localized severe damage (such as that in Crescent City in 1964), and no studies of the economic impacts were completed. A rare study of the economic impacts of a tsunami event has recently been produced for the Tohoku earthquake and tsunami (Kajitani and others, 2013). Quarterly declines in Japan’s GDP are observed to peak at ‒1.63 percent in the second quarter after the event and stagnate for the rest of the year. The majority of the economic impacts are attributed to the tsunami rather than the earthquake. The hardest hit sectors are identified as agriculture, fisheries, manufacturing, retail, and tourism. Other relevant studies have focused on the economic impacts of threats that close POLA and POLB. We find one analysis of a potential tsunami scenario affecting the California economy through disruption of port operations. Borrero and others (2005) estimated economic impacts to the southern California economy of $7 to $40 billion from a locally generated tsunami that closes POLA and POLB for as much as 1 year. There have also been several studies of the economic impacts of non-tsunami events affecting POLA and POLB. Analyses of an 11-day labor lockout produced a range of estimated national impacts of as much as $1.94 billion/day (Park and others 2008, Martin Associates 2001). Examination of a potential terrorist attack that closes the San Pedro port for 1 month yielded a $29 billion impact to the California economy (Park, 2008). These studies have reinforced the importance of recognizing economic resilience in economic impact analyses. Hall (2004) criticized the upper-end estimate of national economic impacts from the labor lockout based on model shortcomings that neglected short-run substitution behavior and fixed the long-run economic behaviors. Following the 2011 Japanese tsunami, resilience was observed in the forms of rapid recovery of manufacturing sectors, energy conservation, and insurance (Kajitani and others, 2013).

California

Stakeholders' priorities for management of a restored elk (Cervus canadensis) population in northeast Minnesota

Wildlife reintroduction projects are an important tool for restoring traditional wildlife heritage, increasing species diversity, providing subsistence and sport hunting and other recreational opportunities, and assisting ecosystem adaption to future climate change. In Minnesota, the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa and some conservationists advocate for the expansion of existing elk range to other parts of the state. For reintroduction projects to be successful, it is helpful if managers understand stakeholders' preferences for management objectives. We used best-worst scaling (BWS) to assess residents' preferences for management objective alternatives. The University of Minnesota, in collaboration with the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa and the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, conducted a mail-back questionnaire of landowners ( n = 4500) and the general public ( n = 4000) in northeastern Minnesota to determine their attitudes toward elk reintroduction. Results suggest that the most preferred objectives were minimizing negative impacts on existing wildlife populations and reintroducing native species. In contrast, the least important objectives were related to providing elk viewing opportunities or maximizing economic opportunities through elk-related tourism. These findings help inform management objectives related to the reintroduction proposal, provide insight to minimize potential conflict and help develop future communication material related to elk reintroduction.

Minnesota

Greater Yellowstone climate assessment: Past, present, and future climate change in the greater Yellowstone watersheds

The Greater Yellowstone Area (GYA) is one of the last remaining large and nearly intact temperate ecosystems on Earth. GYA was originally defined in the 1970s as the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, which encompassed the minimum range of the grizzly bear. The boundary now includes about 22 million acres (8.9 million ha) in northwestern Wyoming, south central Montana, and eastern Idaho (Figure ES-1). Two national parks, five national forests, three wildlife refuges, 20 counties, and state and private lands lie within the GYA boundary (Figure ES-1). The Tribal Nations of the Eastern Shoshone, Northern Arapaho, Apsa´alooke/Crow, Northern Cheyenne, Shoshone, and Bannock have reservations in and near the Greater Yellowstone Area, and 27 Tribes are formally recognized to have historical connections to the lands and resources of the region. Natural resources sensitive to climate change connect many of the major economic activities of the GYA, including tourism and recreation, agriculture, and energy development.

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming

Processes influencing the transport and fate of contaminated sediments in the coastal ocean– Boston Harbor and Massachusetts Bay

Most of the major urban centers of the United States including Boston, New York, Washington, Chicago, New Orleans, Miami, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Seattle—are on a coast (fig. 1.1). All of these cities discharge treated sewage effluent into adjacent waters. In 2000, 74 percent of the U.S. population lived within 200 kilometers (km) of the coast. Between 1980 and 2002, the population density in coastal communities increased approximately 4.5 times faster than in noncoastal areas of the U.S. (Perkins, 2004). More people generate larger volumes of wastes, increase the demands on wastewater treatment, expand the area of impervious land surfaces, and use more vehicles that contribute contaminants to street runoff. According to the National Coastal Condition Report II (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2005a), on the basis of coastal habitat, water and sediment quality, benthic index, and fish tissue, the overall national coastal condition is only poor to fair and the overall coastal condition in the highly populated Northeast is poor. Scientific information helps managers to prioritize and regulate coastal-ocean uses that include recreation, commercial fishing, transportation, waste disposal, and critical habitat for marine organisms. These uses are often in conflict with each other and with environmental concerns. Developing a strategy for managing competing uses while maintaining sustainability of coastal resources requires scientific understanding of how the coastal ocean system behaves and how it responds to anthropogenic influences. This report provides a summary of a multidisciplinary research program designed to improve our understanding of the transport and fate of contaminants in Massachusetts coastal waters. Massachusetts Bay and Boston Harbor have been a focus of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) research because they provide a diverse geographic setting for developing a scientific understanding of the geology, geochemistry, and oceanography of coastal systems in general. Scientific data from this region can also be used to inform decisions about important economic, environmental, and political issues. From the economic viewpoint, the annual value of tourism and shipping in Massachusetts and Cape Cod Bays is about $1.5 billion and $1.9 billion, respectively. Commercial and recreational fishing generates about $240 million per year in the same region (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2005b). The environmental issue is the 300-year history of waste discharge from the Boston metropolitan area into the harbor. This history is punctuated by cycles of environmental degradation, public outcry, and improvements in the sewage treatment system. With each improvement, however, the continuous growth of population in greater Boston (fig. 1.2) and the resulting increase in the volume of waste exceeded the capacity of the treatment system, thereby setting the stage for a new contamination crisis. By the 1980s, the levels of contaminants in sediments of Boston Harbor were among the highest in the nation (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1987). Fish were diseased, shellfish beds were closed, and swimming beaches were unsafe after heavy rains; in general, water quality and aesthetics were below acceptable standards. Legal and political issues have always been part of Boston Harbor’s history. The environmental conditions in the 1980s were highlighted in a 1983 legal suit brought by the city of Quincy against the Metropolitan District Commission (MDC, the state agency responsible for sewage treatment) and heads of three state agencies for discharging untreated or poorly treated sewage into the harbor (Dolin, 2004). The suit never went to trial, but through the actions of a Massachusetts Superior Court, the issue of Boston Harbor contamination remained on the political and public agenda. The judge called the harbor “unsafe, unsanitary, indecent, in violation of the law (Clean Water Act), and a danger to the health and welfare of the people” (Forman, 1984). To force the state legislature to implement a plan to improve harbor conditions, the judge threatened to place the MDC in receivership and curtail new sewage hookups for industry. Under intense lobbying by business, the legislature created the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) in December 1984. The independent MWRA was established to manage Boston’s waste treatment system and was given the authority to float bonds to pay for major improvements in the treatment system. In 1985, a Federal court began hearings on a suit brought by the Conservation Law Foundation, the Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and towns of Quincy and Winthrop against the MDC and MWRA (as heir to responsibilities of the MDC) for years of violation of the Clean Water Act. The judge ruled against the defendants and required all the parties to submit a construction plan and schedule for a new sewage treatment system. From these submissions, he developed a schedule for treatment system upgrades that would give the “citizens of this commonwealth a public assurance that Boston Harbor will be cleaned up within a defined period of time” (Dolin, 2004). The MWRA’s Boston Harbor cleanup program (Levy and Connor, 1992) has transformed the Boston sewage system. Key improvements were to (1) reduce contaminants at the industrial source; (2) remediate leaks in the sewage-collection system; (3) eliminate sewage sludge discharge to the harbor; (4) upgrade sewage treatment from primary to secondary; (5) construct a new ocean outfall 15.2 km offshore in Massachusetts Bay for discharge of treated effluent (fig. 1.3); and (6) implement improvements in the combined-sewer-overflow system. As part of the harbor cleanup program, the MWRA developed a comprehensive monitoring program (summarized in MWRA, 2004) to assess changes in the harbor and bays that specifically related to the new sewage system. Additional information about conditions and processes in the coastal system on a regional scale and over a long time period was and continues to be important in predicting and interpreting local change. Implementation of the MWRA’s program and the mission of the USGS to understand the geology of the nation’s offshore waters provided an opportunity to conduct a cooperative multidisciplinary research program. This USGS program addresses basic scientific questions as well as concerns raised by management regarding the design, implementation, and assessment of the new sewage treatment system. Already active in Boston Harbor during the late 1970s, the USGS expanded research into Massachusetts Bay with a multidisciplinary program in 1989.

Massachusetts