Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “U.S. Forest Service Proceedings”

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.

4 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2000

Would ecological landscape restoration make the Bandelier Wilderness more or less of a wilderness?

The purpose of this paper is to foster discussion on the basic issue of whether it is appropriate or not to intervene in designated wilderness areas that have been “trammeled by man” and, as a result, no longer retain their “primeval character and influence.” We explore this wilderness management dilemma (whether we can or should actively manage wilderness conditions to restore and protect wilderness and other values) by asking seven questions relating to a wilderness area that is no longer “natural.” (For the purposes of this discussion, “natural” is defined by words and phrases used in the 1964 Wilderness Act: “a community of life untrammeled by man”; “land retaining its primeval character and influence”; and or existing in an “unimpaired condition.”) Debate on this issue is not new, but is intensifying, since most wilderness areas in the continental United States are not pristine and ecosystem research has shown that conditions in many are deteriorating. To facilitate dialog on this wilderness management topic we focus on a case-study of a proposed large-scale project to restore piñon-juniper woodlands in the Bandelier Wilderness, New Mexico.

New Mexico↗
USGS2016

Proceedings of the 12th Biennial Conference of research on the Colorado Plateau

Introduction The Colorado Plateau is a physiographic region that encompasses 330,000 square kilometers in parts of four states in the southwestern United States (Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, and Arizona). Known for its high deserts, the Colorado Plateau also includes isolated mountains, high plateaus, and rugged canyons. Not only is the region topographically diverse, but geologically, biologically, and culturally diverse as well. The landscape is managed by Federal entities including the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service, and the U.S. Forest Service; Tribal nations including the Navajo Nation, Kaibab Paiute, Mountain Ute, Southern Ute, Hopi, Zuni, Hualapai, Havasupai, and White Mountain Apache Tribes; State land and wildlife management agencies; and privately owned holdings, creating complex interactions and management challenges. Population growth, increased tourism to Federal and State lands, and energy development have increased water demands and altered land-use patterns, and these changes have emerged as management challenges facing the people working and living in the region. Climate change, particularly the ongoing drought, has exacerbated the effects of population growth, land-use change, and other stressors such as invasive species. As managers seek solutions to the challenges facing the region’s natural and cultural resources, the Biennial Conference of Science and Management of the Colorado Plateau has become an important venue for exchanging information about emerging management concerns and recent scientific research. Each biennial conference has sought to promote discussion, information sharing, and productive communication among the managers, scientists, students, administrators, tribal representatives, and others who attend the conference with the goal of enhancing the use of the best available science to manage the region’s incomparable natural and cultural resources. The publication and dissemination of a conference proceedings series expands the reach of the conference beyond those people in attendance and creates a record on the research presented. The idea of producing a conference proceedings, and its subsequent publication, first occurred in 1993 following the first biennial conference in 1991. A published volume of contributed papers has followed each subsequent biennial conference, including this volume. The venue for publishing proceedings has changed over the years and has included the National Park Service, the Government Printing Office, the U.S. Geological Survey, and University of Arizona Press. Recently, van Riper and others (2015) published a compilation of the abstracts from the 11 previous conference proceedings. Collectively, the proceedings highlight approximately 25 years of natural- and cultural-resources research, promoting the integration of research with resource management across the Colorado Plateau. This volume is freely downloadable by the public, thereby further expanding the influence of this conference beyond the Colorado Plateau. The 12th Biennial Conference held in Flagstaff, Arizona, from September 16 to 19, 2013, covered a range of topics in the physical, biological, and socio-cultural sciences. The conference was organized and hosted by Northern Arizona University’s ( NAU) Merriam-Powell Center for Environmental Research, the Colorado Plateau Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit, and the U.S. Geological Survey Southwest Biological Science Center. Financial and in-kind support was provided by a wide range of organizations including the U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, Grand Canyon Trust, Colorado Plateau Research Station, and various NAU entities. NAU sponsors include the Landscape Conservation Initiative, School of Forestry, School of Earth Science and Environmental Sustainability, Office of the Provost, and Office of the Vice President of Research. Contributors to these proceedings include researchers and managers from Federal, State, and Tribal governments, universities, private entities, and non-profit organizations. In this regard, this conference has wide-ranging support and participation among private and public entities involved in the science and management of natural resources on the Colorado Plateau.

Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah↗
USGS2017

Effects of habitat and climate change on blackbird populations

Global biodiversity loss is proceeding at an accelerating pace (Newbold et al. 2015, 2016) in large part due to land use and, climate change, and associated spread of disease and non-native species (Hobbs et al. 2006, Williams and Jackson 2007, Ellis 2011, Radeloff et al. 2015). Over the last century, U.S. average temperature has increased 0.7–1.1°C, leading to an increased frost-free season, more frequent and intense heat waves, and increased frequency and intensity of winter storms; mean precipitation has increased, with increases in heavy downpours (Melillo et al. 2014). The dominant land uses in the U.S. are lands devoted to forest (671 million acres; 30%), pasture/range (614 million acres, 27%), and agriculture (408 million acres, 18%) (Economic Research Service 2011). Martinuzzi et al. (2015) projected changes in land use to the middle of the 21st century and found that at least 11% of the U.S. land cover (an area larger than Texas) was expected to change cover class (Figure 1). At the same time, mean temperature is expected to further increase 1.1–1.7°C by mid-century and 2.2–3.9°C by end-of-century (Melillo et al. 2014). In this age of unprecedented human-induced environmental change, understanding the relationships of species to the habitat and climatic conditions they experience is crucial to conservation and management. Improved understanding of relationships with habitat and climate will better inform management decisions designed to reduce crop depredation caused by blackbirds.

Book chapter↗
USGS2003

A Framework for Long-term Ecological Monitoring in Olympic National Park: Prototype for the Coniferous Forest Biome

This report is the result of a five-year collaboration between scientists of the U.S. Geological Survey Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center, Olympic Field Station, and the natural resources staff of Olympic National Park to develop a comprehensive strategy for monitoring natural resources of Olympic National Park. Olympic National Park is the National Park Serviceʼs prototype monitoring park, representing parks in the coniferous forest biome. Under the umbrella of the National Park Serviceʼs prototype parks program, U.S. Geological Survey and Olympic National Park staffs are obligated to: develop strategies and designs for monitoring the long-term health and integrity of national park ecosystems with a significant coniferous forest component. design exportable monitoring protocols that can be used by other parks within the coniferous forest biome (i.e., parks having similar environments), and create a demonstration area and ʻcenter of excellenceʼ for assisting other parks in developing ecological monitoring programs. Olympic National Park is part of the North Coast and Cascades Network, a network of seven Pacific Northwestern park units created recently by the National Park Serviceʼs Inventory and Monitoring Program to extend the monitoring of ʻvital signsʼ of park health to all National Park Service units. It is our intent and hope that the monitoring strategies and conceptual models described here will meet the overall purpose of the prototype parks monitoring program in proving useful not only to Olympic National Park, but also to parks within the North Coast and Cascades Network and elsewhere. Part I contains the conceptual design and sampling framework for the prototype long-term monitoring program in Olympic National Park. In this section, we explore key elements of monitoring design that help to ensure the spatial, ecological, and temporal integration of monitoring program elements and discuss approaches used to design an ecosystem-based monitoring program. Basic monitoring components include ecosystem drivers, (e.g., climate, atmospheric inputs, human pressures), indicators of ecosystem integrity (e.g., biogeochemical indicators), known threats (e.g., impacts of introduced mountain goats), and focal or ʻkeyʼ species (e.g., rare or listed species, Roosevelt elk). Monitoring system drivers and key indicators of ecosystem integrity provide the long-term baseline needed to judge what constitutes ʻunnaturalʼ variation in park resources and provide the earliest possible warning of unacceptable change. Monitoring effects of known threats and the status of focal species will provide information useful to park managers for dealing with current park issues. In Part I we describe the process of identifying potential indicators of ecological condition and present conceptual models of park ecosystems. In addition we report results from several workshops held in conjunction with Olympic National Park aimed at identifying potential indicators of change in the parkʼs ecosystem. First, we describe the responses of Olympic National Park staff to the generic question, “What is the most important resource to monitor in Olympic National Park and why?” followed by the responses from resource and land managers from areas adjoining the park. We also catalogue the responses of various expert groups that we asked to help identify the most appropriate system drivers and indicators of change in the Olympic National Park ecosystems. Results of the workshops provided the justification for selecting basic indicators of ecosystem integrity, effects of current threats to park resources, and focal resources of parks to detect both the currently evident and unforeseeable changes in park resources. We conclude Part I by exploring several generic statistical issues relevant to monitoring natural resources in Olympic National Park. Specifically we discuss trade-offs associated with sampling extensively versus sampling intensively in smaller geographic regions and describe a conceptual framework to guide development of a generic sampling frame for monitoring. We recommend partitioning Olympic National Park into three zones of decreasing accessibility to maximize monitoring efficiency. We present examples of how the generic sampling frame could be used to help ensure spatial integration of individual monitoring projects. Part II of the report is a record of the potential monitoring questions and indicators identified to date in our workshops. The presentation is organized according to the major system drivers, components, and processes identified in the intermediate-level working model of the Olympic National Park ecosystem. For each component of the park system, we develop the need and justification for monitoring, articulate park management issues, and describe key resources and ecosystem functions. We also present a pictorial conceptual model of each ecological subsystem, identify monitoring questions, and list potential indicators for each monitoring question. We conclude each section by identifying linkages of indicators to other ecological subsystems in our general ecosystem model, spatial and temporal contexts for monitoring (where and how often to monitor), and research and development needs. Part II represents the most current detailed listing of potential indicators—the material for subsequent discussions of monitoring priorities and selection of indicators for protocol development. Collectively, the sections of this report contain a comprehensive list of the important monitoring questions and potential indicators as well as recommendations for designing an integrated monitoring program. In Part I, Chapter 6 we provide recommendations on how to proceed with the important next steps in the design process: establishing priorities among the many possible monitoring questions and indicators, and beginning to research and design effective long-term monitoring protocols.

Information and Technology Report↗